Device evaluation by manufacturer: the aquabeam handpiece was returned along with the scope carriage for investigation.Visual inspection confirmed that the handpiece was bent, and the scope carriage separated from the axle, hence reported failures were confirmed.A review of the device history record (dhr) ab2000-b / serial number (b)(4) and aquabeam handpiece / lot number (b)(4) was conducted, which confirmed that there were no non-conformances, failures, discrepancies, or missed steps during the manufacturing process that could be related to the reported event.The review indicated that the system met all design and manufacturing specifications when released for distribution.A review of the aquabeam robotic system instructions for use, ifu0105-00 rev.A.States the following: 5.Precautions.5.1.Precautions: general.If excessive resistance is encountered during aquabeam scope positioning, reposition the aquabeam handpiece to minimize tenting the prostate in order to reduce the chance of damaging the aquabeam scope.It is possible that an atypical patient anatomy may have caused the handpiece to be bent and the excessive force on the scope carriage might have separated the scope carriage body from the axle.However, the cause cannot be confirmed.Submission of this report does not constitute an admission that the manufacturer's product caused or contributed to the event.
|
A male patient underwent an aquablation procedure for symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia (bph).Procept biorobotics corporation (procep) became aware that during the aquablation procedure the aquabeam handpiece bent, and the scope carriage cracked.As a result, the handpiece was replaced with a new handpiece unit and the procedure was continued through successful completion.The reported event caused a surgical procedural delay of over 20 minutes.There were no adverse health consequences to the patient due to the procedural delay.
|