| Model Number |
B2100-060 |
| Medical Device Problem Codes |
Difficult to Remove (1528); Material Rupture (1546); Material Separation (1562)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Code |
No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions (4582)
|
| Date of Event |
11/17/2021
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Serious Injury
|
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
It was reported that during a procedure to treat a heavily calcified re-thrombosed stent, after the 10x60mm armada 35 balloon dilatation catheter (bdc) was advanced to the lesion, and after several inflations of the balloon, between nominal pressure and above nominal pressure, the balloon ruptured with one fragment separating from the device.Resistance was noted when pulling the bdc back into the introducer sheath.Surgical intervention was required to remove balloon fragment from the patient anatomy, which was successfully removed.There was no reported adverse patient sequela.No additional information was provided.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
The device is expected to be returned for investigation.It has not yet been received.A follow-up report will be submitted with all additional relevant information.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
Visual inspection was performed on the returned device.The reported balloon rupture and separation were confirmed.The reported difficulty removing the device could not be replicated in a testing environment due to the condition of the returned device.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.There was no leak noted during preparation or during the reported multiple prior inflations, which suggests a product quality issue did not contribute to the reported difficulties.The investigation determined the reported balloon rupture, difficulty removing the device, balloon separation, surgical procedure, and removal of foreign body appear to be related to circumstances of the procedure.Based on the reported information and analysis of the returned device, it is likely that the balloon rupture was the result of interaction with the heavily calcified lesion.In addition, the resistance noted during removal and radial separation of the balloon was likely the result of the ruptured balloon material catching on the introducer sheath during removal.There is no indication of a product quality issue with respect to design, manufacture or labeling of the device.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|