|
Due to the automated mes system there are controls in the manufacturing process to ensure the product met specifications upon release.During visual inspection, the main coil was found to be broken/fractured but the suture was found to be unbroken.The main coil was found to be stretched.The coil delivery wire and the proximal contact were found to be intact.During the functional inspection, coil in catheter friction functional test was not performed due to coil introducer sheath friction; however, the analysis results are consistent with the reported event.The main coil stretched functional test was not required as the defect was confirmed.The reported complaint was confirmed based on analysis.The device failed to meet specifications when received for complaint investigation based on the analyzed anomalies noted to the device.The reported event is covered in the device directions for use (dfu).As well, the risk of the reported event is documented in the risk documentation and there are current controls to mitigate the risk of the as reported event.Additional information provided by the customer indicated that the device was confirmed to be in good condition during preparation/prior to use on the patient and was prepared as per the dfu, continuous flush was set up and maintained throughout the clinical procedure, the same microcatheter was used to complete the procedure.The device was analyzed and the main coil was stretched and broken/fractured at the proximal end near the detachment zone.It is probable that the coil was damaged during transfer or during advancement through the microcatheter causing the reported and analyzed defects.An assignable cause of procedural factors will be assigned to the reported and to the analyzed events, as these issues appear to be associated with a product that met stryker design and manufacturing specifications and was used in accordance with the dfu, but performance was limited due to procedural and/or anatomical factors during use.
|