|
As reported, during a left leg atherectomy, a pinhole was found in an advance 18 lp low profile pta balloon dilatation catheter.The device was placed via a 5fr cook ansel sheath to treat a superficial femoral artery/popliteal lesion.The vessel was not occluded, angulated, tortuous, or calcified.The device was attempted to be inflated to ten atmospheres once using 90% saline/10% contrast.Blood was then noted in the inflation device.The device was deflated and allowed to return to ambient pressure before being removed without difficulty from the patient over a wire.After the balloon was removed, a pinhole leak was noted in the balloon.The procedure was completed using another manufacturer's balloon.A section of the device did not remain inside the patient¿s body.The patient did not require any additional intervention due to this occurrence.The patient did not experience any adverse effects due to this occurrence.
|
|
Blank fields on this form indicate the information is unknown, unchanged, or unavailable.Event summary: as reported, during a left leg atherectomy, a pinhole was found in an advance 18 lp low profile pta balloon dilatation catheter.The device was placed via a 5fr cook ansel sheath to treat a superficial femoral artery/popliteal lesion.The vessel was not occluded, angulated, tortuous, or calcified.The device was attempted to be inflated to ten atmospheres once using 90% saline/10% contrast.Blood was then noted in the inflation device.The device was deflated and allowed to return to ambient pressure before being removed without difficulty from the patient over a wire.After the balloon was removed, a pinhole leak was noted in the balloon.The procedure was completed using another manufacturer's balloon.A section of the device did not remain inside the patient¿s body.The patient did not require any additional intervention due to this occurrence.The patient did not experience any adverse effects due to this occurrence.Investigation ¿ evaluation: a visual inspection of the returned device was conducted.A document-based investigation was also performed including a review of complaint history, device history record, drawing, the instructions for use, specifications, and quality control data.The complainant returned one advance 18 balloon catheter to cook for investigation.Physical examination and tabletop testing confirmed a pinhole leak in the balloon.No other damages/anomalies to the product were noted from inspection.A review of the device history record (dhr) found no non-conformances related to the reported failure mode.Because there are no related non-conformances, adequate inspection activities have been established, there is objective evidence that the dhr was fully executed, and no other related complaints from the lot have been received from the field, it was concluded that there is no evidence that nonconforming product exists in house or in field.A review of complaint history records shows no other complaints associated with the complaint device lot.The instructions for use (ifu), provides the following information to the user related to the reported failure mode: instructions for use: balloon preparation.¿choose a balloon appropriate to lesion length and vessel diameter.¿ ¿upon removal from package, inspect the catheter to ensure no damage has occurred during shipping.¿ balloon introduction and inflation: ¿note: if resistance is met while advancing the balloon dilatation catheter, determine the cause and proceed with caution.¿ ¿inflate balloon to desired pressure.Adhere to recommended balloon inflation pressures.(see compliance card insert.)¿ ¿if balloon pressure is lost and/or balloon rupture occurs, deflate balloon and remove balloon and sheath as a unit.¿ balloon deflation and withdrawal: ¿upon catheter withdrawal, a gentle counterclockwise rotation of the catheter will assist balloon rewrap, minimizing trauma to the percutaneous entry site.¿ how supplied: ¿store in a dark, dry, cool place.Avoid extended exposure to light.Upon removal from package, inspect the product to ensure no damage has occurred.¿ cook concluded that a component failure unrelated to the manufacturing or design of the product was the cause of this incident.The information provided upon review of complaint file, device history record, complaint history, device master record, and design verification testing provide objective evidence to support that the device was manufactured to specification.Per the quality engineering risk assessment, no further action is warranted.Cook medical will continue to monitor this device via the complaints database for similar complaints.This report is required by the fda under 21 cfr part 803.This report is based on unconfirmed information submitted by others.Neither the submission of this report nor any statement made in it is intended to be an admission that any cook device is defective or malfunctioned; that a death or serious injury occurred; or that any cook device caused or contributed to; or is likely to cause or contribute to a death or serious injury if a malfunction occurred.
|