|
As reported, during an intervention of a chronic total occlusion (cto) of the left superficial femoral artery (sfa) the tip of an approach cto microwire wire guide began to separate.Access was gained through the common femoral artery, and the wire was advanced through an angled cxi catheter in an attempt to cross the cto.The anatomy was mildly calcified.After a few attempts, a dot at the tip of the wire was noted under fluoroscopy, and the tip appeared to be separating.It is unknown how the procedure was completed.No portion of the device was left within the patient.No additional procedures or prolonged hospitalization were needed.The patient did not experience any adverse effects due to this occurrence.
|
|
Summary of event: as reported, during an intervention of a chronic total occlusion (cto) of the left superficial femoral artery (sfa), the tip of an approach cto microwire wire guide began to separate.Access was gained through the common femoral artery, and the wire was advanced through an angled cxi catheter in an attempt to cross the cto.The anatomy was mildly calcified.After a few attempts, a dot at the tip of the wire was noted under fluoroscopy, and the tip appeared to be separating.It is unknown how the procedure was completed.No portion of the device was left within the patient.No additional procedures or prolonged hospitalization were needed.The patient did not experience any adverse effects due to this occurrence.Investigation evaluation: a review of the complaint history, device history record, instructions for use (ifu), and quality control procedures was conducted during the investigation.A visual inspection of the complaint device was also conducted.One used approach cto microwire wire guide (cmw-14-300-25g) was returned to cook for investigation.One centimeter of the distal tip was unraveled.A supplier investigation was also requested, and was performed by asahi intec co.The supplier confirmed the wire was broken, the coil was disturbed, and the coating was peeling off.No other abnormalities were found.The supplier reviewed manufacturing records and concluded the product was built to specification.A document-based investigation evaluation was performed.No related non-conformances were found, and there have been no other reported complaints for this lot number.Cook has concluded that sufficient inspection activities are in place to identify this failure mode prior to distribution.The product ifu instructs the user to inspect the product for damage upon removal from the package.The information provided upon review of the dmr, dhr, ifu, and investigation of the returned device suggests that the device was manufactured to specification.There is no evidence of nonconforming devices from the complaint lot in-house or in the field.Based on the information provided and the results of the investigation, cook has concluded that the patient¿s calcified anatomy contributed to this event.The risk analysis for this failure mode was reviewed and no additional escalation was required.The appropriate personnel have been notified and cook will continue to monitor for similar events.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.
|