Model Number RC2012 |
Device Problems
Use of Device Problem (1670); Material Deformation (2976); Unintended Movement (3026)
|
Patient Problem
Insufficient Information (4580)
|
Event Date 08/30/2022 |
Event Type
Injury
|
Manufacturer Narrative
|
The investigation is still in progress; therefore, a conclusion has yet to be established.A supplemental report will be submitted accordingly upon investigation completion.Edwards will continue to review and monitor all reported events.Trends are monitored on a monthly basis and if action is required, appropriate investigation will be performed.
|
|
Event Description
|
It was reported that during use of a rc2012 retrograde cannula it was noted that the device was not working properly.The metal portion of the rc2012 went through the balloon part.Due to this occurrence the surgeon requested ostial cannulas.
|
|
Manufacturer Narrative
|
Updated h3 and h6 per new information received.Customer report of metal portion of the rc2012 went through the balloon part was confirmed.Device was returned with visible traces of blood.As received, malleable stylet was inserted in the cardioplegia cannula and appeared bent.Stylet extended 7mm at the distal end through one of the three infusion hole.Infusion hole appeared to be intact.Resistance was met when stylet was removed from the cannula.The balloon inflated without difficulty.All other through lumens were patent without any leakage or occlusion.No other visual damage, contamination, or other abnormalities were found to the device.
|
|
Event Description
|
It was reported that during use of a rc2012 retrograde cannula it was noted that the device was not working properly.The metal portion of the rc2012 went through the balloon part.Due to this occurrence the surgeon requested ostial cannulas.Product eval showed infusion hole appeared to be intact.Resistance was met when stylet was removed from the cannula.The balloon inflated without difficulty.Lumens were patent without any leakage or occlusion.No other visual damage, contamination, or other abnormalities were found to the device.
|
|
Manufacturer Narrative
|
Dhr review was performed, and no relevant non-conformances were identified.Based on the information available the complaint is able to be confirmed.It is likely that the observed damage to the device is due to the user exerting excessive force during stylet insertion into cannula.It is unlikely that the product left the manufacturing facility in the observed state furthermore, the damage was not noticed prior to the procedure.The lhr performed does not suggest a lot specific non-conformance.An edwards defect has not been confirmed.
|
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|