Coating began to unravel from the first wire used (1820334-2016-00048).The doctor used a different wire in a different scope, upon advancing the wire, it became tight and was noted to have a nick upon removal (1820334-2016-00044).The patient did not require any additional procedures due to this occurrence.According to the initial reporter, the patient did not experience any adverse effects due to this occurrence.
|
(b)(4).Investigation/evaluation: during the course of the investigation, a review of complaint history, documentation, instructions for use (ifu), trends and a visual inspection of returned devices were conducted.The complaint device was not returned to assist with this investigation.Two unused devices were returned.The two returned products were opened, lubricated, and removed from the wire guide holders.Using a gloved hand, the surface of the devices were evaluated.No nicks, or surface imperfections/defects were noted on the two returned products.Based on the investigation evaluation, there was no indication that a design or process related failure mode contributed to this event.The ifu states "when using wire guide through a metal cannula/needle, use caution as damage may occur to outer coating." it is likely that this event was related to product handling as the coating was likely damaged by the access needle.There is no evidence to suggest this product was not manufactured to specifications.We will continue to monitor for similar complaints.Per the quality engineering risk assessment no further action is required.
|
Coating began to unravel from the first wire used (1820334-2016-00048).The doctor used a different wire in a different scope, upon advancing the wire, it became tight and was noted to have a nick upon removal (1820334-2016-00044).The patient did not require and additional procedures due to this occurrence.According to the initial reporter, the patient did not experience any adverse effects due to this occurrence.
|