The device history record review confirms that the device met all material, assembly and performance specifications.The subject device is not available; therefore, functional testing as well as physical analysis cannot be performed.In the case of this complaint it is possible that the main coil encountered resistance while advancing through microcatheter and detached prematurely during retrieval due to some procedural factors encountered during use.Also as reported that a non-stryker microcatheter was used for performing the procedure which can also contribute to failure due to potential incompatibility of non-stryker devices, possibly leading to the reported main coil prematurely detached/separated inside patient, and coil in catheter friction.However it cannot be confirmed.As per additional information no damage was noted to the device prior to use and the device was prepared as per dfu (directions for use) for this product.Therefore; an assignable cause of ¿undeterminable¿ will be assigned to the reported event as the device was not returned and the review and analysis of all available information failed to indicate an assignable cause or probable assignable cause.The subject device is not available.
|
It was reported that during a coil embolization procedure, the physician attempted to detach the coil, but the coil wasn¿t sitting in the aneurysm as the physician wanted and the coil was repositioned multiple times.Physician also mentioned that some resistance was observed inside the microcatheter.As the physician attempted to remove the coil, it detached within the microcatheter.The physician removed the detached coil along with the microcatheter without any clinical consequence to the patient.
|