(b)(6).Complaint conclusion: the device was returned for analysis.Located 3.2cm proximally off the ball tip was coil damaged.The ball tip¿s radius has distortion at one area.The distal section of the coil is undamaged.As viewed through the sheath, the proximal end of the coil has buckled back.The coil was mechanically severed from the detachment fiber.The fiber is intact.The coil¿s socket ring has been severed from the solder point.The evidence suggests that coil damage contributed to the resistance during the coil¿s advancement.The circumstances of how and when this damage occurred to the coil cannot be determined.It also cannot be determined if the coil¿s damage was the sole cause of the resistance experienced during the procedure or was the result of unknown interference.In addition; without the return of the sl-10 microcatheter and the hemostatic valve used in the procedure; it cannot be determined if these components contributed to the complaint event.Since there was no evidence of a manufacturing issue related to the complaint, no corrective action was taken.This mdr is being submitted as part of a retrospective review as the result of a recent fda audit and with accordance to the requirements of code of federal regulations - 21 cfr part 803, medical device reporting.
|