|
As reported, during an endovascular treatment procedure, a flexor ansel guiding sheath frayed.Contralateral approach was gained from the left femoral artery to treat a below-the-knee lesion.When the user attempted to insert the sheath, the dilator was able to be inserted, but the sheath would not advance.Severe calcification of the access site and arteriosclerosis were noted.The user removed the device and noted the sheath had been frayed.A different manufacturer's sheath was used instead.There have been no adverse effects to the patient reported.
|
|
Event summary: as reported, during an endovascular treatment procedure, a flexor ansel guiding sheath frayed.Contralateral approach was gained from the left femoral artery to treat a below-the-knee lesion.When the user attempted to insert the sheath, the dilator was able to be inserted, but the sheath would not advance.Severe calcification of the access site and arteriosclerosis were noted.The user removed the device and noted the sheath had been frayed.A different manufacturer's sheath was used instead.There have been no adverse effects to the patient reported.Investigation - evaluation: reviews of the complaint history, device history record, instructions for use, drawing, manufacturing instructions, and quality control procedures and a visual inspection of the device were conducted during the investigation.One ksaw-5.0-18/38-55-rb-anl1-hc was returned for investigation.The distal tip was wrinkled/accordioned.Scratches were noted on the surface at the distal end.A document-based investigation evaluation was performed.No related non-conformances were recorded, and there have been no other reported complaints for this lot number.The device history record review provides objective evidence that the device was manufactured to specification.There is no evidence of nonconforming devices from the complaint lot in house or in the field.A review of relevant manufacturing documents was conducted.No gaps in production or processing controls were noted.There is no indication that a design or process related failure mode contributed to the reported event.Sufficient inspection activities are in place to identify this failure mode prior to distribution.The device is provided with instructions for use which state, ¿upon removal from package, inspect the product to ensure no damage has occurred.¿ based on the available information, cook has concluded that a component failure unrelated to manufacturing or design deficiencies contributed to this incident.Cook will continue monitoring of similar complaints and has 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 and is based on unconfirmed information submitted by others.Neither the submission of this report nor any statement contained herein is intended to be an admission that any cook device is defective or malfunctioned, that a death or serious injury occurred, nor that any cook device caused, contributed to, or is likely to cause or contribute to a death or serious injury if a malfunction occurred.
|