Device evaluated by mfr: the device was returned for analysis.A visual examination identified that the balloon material had torn circumferentially from the proximal balloon bond.The torn balloon material was approximately 80mm in length was noted to be severely bunched up and pushed forward distally towards the tip of the device.A smaller section of balloon material was completely detached from the balloon material and was approximately 27mm in length.During analysis the investigator retracted the bunched-up balloon material.A visual and microscopic examination was performed on both sections of balloon material and no issues were noted with the balloon material that could have contributed to the complaint incident.A visual and tactile examination of the returned device identified severe kinking and shaft damage along the length of the device.Most of the damage was noted distal to the proximal balloon bond at the site of the balloon material detachment.This type of damage is consistent with excessive force being applied to the delivery system.No issues were noted with the shaft or proximal balloon bond that could have contributed to the complaint incident.A visual and microscopic examination of the tips and markerbands identified no damage or any issues that could have contributed to the complaint incident.No other issues were identified during the product analysis.The manufacturing batch record review confirmed that the device met all material, assembly and performance specifications.The investigation conclusion is operational context as the product meets the design & manufacture specification but due to anatomical/procedural factors encountered during the procedure, performance was limited.(b)(4).
|