|
Evaluation of the returned ruby coil revealed an undamaged and functional device.During functional testing, the returned ruby coil was able to advance through its introducer sheath and a demonstration lantern without issue.The reported complaint could not be confirmed.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 patient was undergoing a coil embolization procedure in the internal iliac artery (iia) using ruby coils, a lantern delivery microcatheter (lantern), and a non-penumbra angiographic catheter.It was noted that the patient anatomy was tortuous.During the procedure, the physician placed a ruby coil in the target vessel using the lantern.While advancing the next ruby coil within its introducer sheath, the physician experienced resistance and subsequently, was unable to advance the ruby coil past its initial position within its introducer sheath.Therefore, the ruby coil was removed.The procedure was completed using another ruby coil, a pod packing coil (pod pc), four non-penumbra coils, and the same lantern.There was no report of an adverse effect to the patient.
|