|
(b)(4).The device was not returned for evaluation.A review of the lot history record identified no manufacturing nonconformities issued to the reported lot that would have contributed to this event.Additionally, a review of the complaint history identified no other similar incidents and/or complaints from this lot.It was reported that force was applied when removing the bdc which resulted in the shaft separating.It should be noted that the coronary dilatation catheters (cdc), nc trek rx, global, instruction for use (ifu) warning section states: if resistance is felt, determine the cause before proceeding.Continuing to advance or retract the catheter while under resistance may result in damage to the vessels and / or damage / separation of the catheter.In this case, it is likely that the violation of the ifu contributed to the reported separation as the device separated after force was applied.The investigation was unable to determine a conclusive cause for the reported difficulty removing the device; however, the reported shaft separation appears to be related to user error/operational context.There is no indication of a product quality issue with respects to the design, manufacture, or labeling of the device.
|
|
It was reported this was a procedure to treat a 95% stenosed, heavily tortuous, and heavily calcified lesion in the proximal diagonal artery.A 2.75x15mm nc trek balloon dilatation catheter (bdc) was advanced without resistance.The bdc was removed; however, resistance with the guide catheter was felt during removal and force was applied.The proximal shaft separated outside the patient anatomy while still on the guidewire.The separated distal shaft was able to be removed by trapping it inside the guiding catheter and removing the whole system.The procedure was successfully completed at this time.There were no reported adverse patient effects and there was no reported clinically significant delay in the procedure.No additional information was provided.
|