|
The patient was undergoing a coil embolization procedure in the cavernous sinus using penumbra smart coils (smart coils) and a non-penumbra microcatheter.It should be noted that the patient's anatomy was tortuous.During the procedure, the physician successfully implanted two smart coils into the target location.While attempting to advance the next smart coil, the coil would not advance past its initial position within its introducer sheath.Therefore, the smart coil was removed.The procedure was completed using six non-penumbra coils and the same microcatheter.There was no report of an adverse effect to the patient.
|
|
Evaluation of the returned smart coil could not confirm the reported complaint, due to the device was returned outside of its introducer sheath.During functional testing, the smart coil was re-sheathed inside its introducer sheath, then the device was able to advance out of the introducer sheath with resistance, due to the offset coil winds on its embolization coil.Based on the reported complaint, these offset coil winds were likely incidental, and the root cause of this damage could not be determined.Further evaluation revealed, pusher assembly kinks.These kinks were likely incidental to the complaint.And may have occurred, during packaging for return to penumbra.Penumbra coils are visually 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.Section h: box 6, conclusions code 1: 4316: the investigation findings do not lead to a clear conclusion about the root cause of the reported complaint, due to the return condition.H3 other text: placeholder.
|