|
Evaluation of the returned ruby coil revealed that the embolization coil was detached from its pusher assembly, the pet lock was intact, and the pull wire was slightly retracted from its initial position within the ddt.If the ruby coil is forcefully retracted against resistance, the pusher assembly may become elongated and the pull wire may retract enough to allow the coil to detach from the pusher assembly.The detached embolization coil was not returned for evaluation; therefore, functional testing could not be performed.The reported resistance experienced during the procedure could not be determined.Evaluation of the returned ruby coil revealed that the pull wire was advanced distal to the pusher assembly ddt, and the pusher assembly was fractured and kinks near the fractured location.If the device is forcefully advanced against resistance, damage such as this may occur.The pusher assembly was fractured; therefore, functional testing could not be performed.The reported resistance experienced during the procedure could not be determined.Further evaluation of the device revealed an offset coil wind on its embolization coil.This damage was likely incidental to the complaint.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.Conclusions code: (b)(4).The investigation findings do not lead to a clear conclusion about the root cause of the reported complaint due to the return condition.This report is associated with mfr report number: 3005168196-2021-00197.
|
|
The patient was undergoing a coil embolization procedure in the left internal iliac artery (iia) using ruby coils and a non-penumbra microcatheter.It was noted that the patient anatomy was tortuous.During the procedure, the first ruby coil became stuck at the distal tip of its introducer sheath; therefore, the ruby coil was removed.The physician then continued with the procedure using a second ruby coil.However, the same issue occurred.Therefore, the ruby coil was removed.The procedure was completed using three new ruby coils.There was no report of an adverse effect to the patient.
|