|
|
| Model Number |
RBY2C1035-B |
| Medical Device Problem Code |
Physical Resistance/Sticking (4012)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Code |
No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions (4582)
|
| Date of Event |
06/08/2021
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Malfunction
|
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
Evaluation of the returned pod8 revealed that the pusher assembly mid-joint was retracted through the introducer sheath friction lock.If this occurs, resistance may be experienced during advancement.During functional testing, the pod8 was able to be re-sheathed and then advanced out of its introducer sheath with resistance advancing the coil from its returned position within its introducer sheath.The pod8 was then advanced through a demonstration lantern without an issue.Further evaluation revealed pusher assembly bends.This damage may be incidental to the reported complaint.Evaluation of the returned ruby coil revealed a functional device.The device was returned unsheathed; therefore, during functional testing, the ruby coil was re-sheathed with its introducer sheath without an issue.The ruby coil was then advanced through its introducer sheath and a demonstration lantern without an issue.The root cause of resistance during the procedure could not be determined.Further evaluation revealed pusher assembly bends.This damage may be incidental to the reported complaint.Penumbra coils are 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.This report is associated with mfr report number: 3005168196-2021-01485.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
The patient was undergoing a coil embolization procedure in the splenic artery using ruby coils, pod coils, and a lantern delivery microcatheter (lantern).It was noted that the patient anatomy was tortuous.During the procedure, while advancing a pod coil, and later a ruby coil, into the target location, the physician lost access with the lantern due to the tortuosity and lack of support with the lantern.The pod coil and ruby coil were removed and re-sheathed.Subsequently, the physician re-accessed the vessel with the lantern and then experienced resistance when advancing the same pod coil and ruby coil through the lantern.Therefore, the pod coil and ruby coil were removed.The procedure was completed using a new pod coil, a new ruby coil, and the same lantern.There was no report of an adverse effect to the patient.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|
|
|