|
As reported, during an unknown procedure, the hub of a flexor high-flex ansel guiding sheath separated from the device.A section of the device did not remain inside the patient¿s body.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.
|
|
Blank fields on this form indicate the information is unknown, unavailable, or unchanged.Initial report: as reported, during an unknown procedure, the hub of a flexor high-flex ansel guiding sheath separated from the device.A section of the device did not remain inside the patient¿s body.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.Investigation ¿ evaluation.Reviews of the complaint history, device history record, instructions for use (ifu), manufacturer¿s instructions, quality control procedures, specifications, and a visual inspection as well as dimensional verification of the returned device were conducted during the investigation.The visual inspection of the returned package confirmed that the two used devices were received with bio present.Both check-flo valves were separated from the sheath material and both flares were out of round.Additionally, a document-based investigation evaluation was performed.The evidence indicates the product was made to specifications.A review of the device history record showed no nonconforming events which could contribute to this failure mode.As there are adequate inspection activities established, and objective evidence that the dhr was fully executed it was concluded that there is no evidence that nonconforming product exists in house or in field.No gaps were discovered in the manufacturing instructions, specifications, or quality control procedures for this device.Cook has concluded that sufficient inspection activities are in place to identify this failure mode prior to distribution.An ifu is provided with this device, which warns ¿if resistance is encountered during advancement of flexor sheath, assess cause of resistance and consider dilation of any restriction identified or consider alternate treatment strategy.If flexor sheath is advanced through resistance, force to remove the sheath will be higher, increasing the risk of sheath material or hub separation upon withdrawal.¿ the ifu goes on to provide specific sheath removal instructions, which includes a consideration to reinsert the dilator prior to sheath removal.Based on the information provided and the examination of the returned product, investigation has concluded that the cause of this event can be traced to component failure.We will continue our monitoring of similar complaints and have notified the appropriate personnel of this event.Per the quality engineering risk assessment no further action is required.This report is required by the fda under 21 cfr part 803.This report is based on unconfirmed information submitted by others.Neither the submission of this report nor any statement made in it is intended to be an admission that any cook device is defective or malfunctioned; that a death or serious injury occurred; or that any cook device caused or contributed to; or is likely to cause or contribute to a death or serious injury if a malfunction occurred.
|