| Model Number |
45-480202-L |
| Medical Device Problem Codes |
Difficult or Delayed Positioning (1157); Detachment of Device or Device Component (2907)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Code |
No Consequences Or Impact To Patient (2199)
|
| Date of Event |
05/21/2020
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Malfunction
|
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
A search for non-conformances associated with this part/lot number combination did not reveal any production-related issues relevant to the complaint that occurred during manufacturing of the device.The device was returned to the manufacturer for evaluation.The investigation is currently ongoing.The instructions for use (ifu) identifies premature coil detachment as a potential complication associated with use of the device.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
It was reported that during placement in the treatment site, the coil would not take shape.During retraction of the device, the implant coil detached from the pusher wire.The implant coil was removed together with the microcatheter.There was no reported patient injury or additional intervention.The patient's condition is reported to be "stable.".
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
The pusher and implant were returned for evaluation.Investigation into the returned device found the implant not attached to the pusher.The implant was stretched and had broken overcoils, broken gel, and kinked implant coils.Inspection of the pusher found the strain relief burnt and the connector was found slightly bent.Additionally, the monofilament profile was found with a mushroom profile.Both the burnt strain relief and mushroom profile suggests that the coil was detached using the v-grip detachment controller.The investigation of the returned coil system found the implant separated from the pusher with signs of activation using the detachment controller.The implant was damaged, and as a result of the damage, the implant did not have the correct shape.The pusher was also kinked at the gold connector, though it is unlikely that this damage is related to the complaint as described.The physical evaluation of the returned coil could not determine the conditions or circumstances that led to the damage, but the damage is consistent with the device experiencing forces over specification.The microcatheter used in the procedure was not received for evaluation, so the investigation could not determine if it had caused or contributed to the reported complaint.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|