|
|
| Model Number |
PXSLIMLAN115T45 |
| Medical Device Problem Codes |
Break (1069); Physical Resistance/Sticking (4012)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Code |
Perforation of Vessels (2135)
|
| Date of Event |
05/04/2021
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Serious Injury
|
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
Potential adverse events in the labeling with the penumbra delivery microcatheter include, but are not limited to, hematoma or hemorrhage at the site, vessel spasm, thrombosis, dissection, perforation or rupture, including death.Evaluation of the returned lantern confirmed that the catheter was fractured.This damage inadvertently occurred while wiping the device after it was removed from the patient as mentioned in the complaint.Further evaluation revealed ovalization on the distal shaft.This damage was incidental to the reported complaint and the root cause could not be determined.Penumbra catheters 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.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
The patient was undergoing a coil embolization procedure to treat a type ii endoleak located on a branch of the iliolumbar artery using a lantern delivery microcatheter (lantern), ruby coils, and a non-penumbra support catheter.During the procedure, it was noted that many small branches were coming off the iliolumbar artery and the physician spent approximately thirty to forty-five minutes searching for the target branch.After locating the target branch, the physician began navigating through the vasculature and inadvertently advanced the lantern up the wrong branch.Resistance was encountered while advancing the lantern and it was noted that the branch was small.The lantern was unable to continue tracking and subsequent imaging revealed that a vessel perforation had occurred.While advancing a ruby coil through the vessel to embolize the perforation, resistance was encountered, and the lantern was pushed out of position.It was reported that the ruby coil was too large, and the vessel was too small; therefore, the ruby coil and lantern were removed from the patient.While wiping down the lantern with wet gauze on the back table, the technician inadvertently broke it.Therefore, the lantern was no longer used in the procedure.A new lantern was then used for imaging and subsequently removed because it was decided that the target branch would be too difficult to access.It was also noted that the vessel perforation had occluded on its own and no additional coils were needed.Therefore, the procedure was discontinued.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|
|
|