| Model Number |
RBY2C0840-A |
| Medical Device Problem Codes |
Failure to Advance (2524); Physical Resistance/Sticking (4012)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Code |
No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions (4582)
|
| Date of Event |
12/03/2020
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Malfunction
|
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
This device is available for return.A follow up mdr will be submitted upon completion of the device investigation.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
The patient was undergoing a coil embolization procedure in the splenic artery using a lantern delivery microcatheter (lantern) and a ruby coil.During the procedure, the physician placed two ruby coils into the target vessel using the lantern.Next, the physician advanced a third ruby coil into the target vessel; however, the physician was not satisfied with the placement of the ruby coil.While retracting the ruby coil to reposition it, the physician experienced resistance and subsequently, the ruby coil became stuck.Therefore, the physician removed the lantern containing the ruby coil and then removed the ruby coil.The procedure was completed using six additional penumbra coils and the same lantern.There was no report of an adverse effect to the patient.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
This report is associated with mfr report number: 3005168196-2021-02194.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
The patient was undergoing a coil embolization procedure in the splenic artery using a lantern delivery microcatheter (lantern) and a ruby coil.During the procedure, the physician placed two ruby coils into the target vessel using the lantern.Next, the physician advanced a third ruby coil into the target vessel; however, the physician was not satisfied with the placement of the ruby coil.While retracting the ruby coil to reposition it, the physician experienced resistance and subsequently, the ruby coil became stuck.Therefore, the physician removed the lantern containing the ruby coil.The procedure was completed using six additional penumbra coils and a non-penumbra microcatheter.There was no report of an adverse effect to the patient.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
Evaluation of the returned ruby coil revealed that the embolization coil was detached from its pusher assembly due to a pusher assembly fracture.If the ruby coil is forcefully manipulated against resistance, the pusher assembly may become kinked and may subsequently fracture.Further evaluation of the returned ruby coil revealed kinks in the pusher assembly.This damage was likely incidental to the reported complaint.The returned device was unable to be tested for the reported issue due to being detached.The root cause of the reported event could not be determined.A demonstration coil was advanced through the non-penumbra microcatheter without an issue.Penumbra coils are visually inspected during in-process inspection and during quality inspection after manufacturing.The manufacturing records for this lot were reviewed and did not reveal any outstanding discrepancies, design, or quality concerns.The investigation findings do not lead to a clear conclusion about the root cause of resistance and ruby coil becoming stuck.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|