| Model Number |
2092-6040 |
| Medical Device Problem Codes |
Material Rupture (1546); Improper or Incorrect Procedure or Method (2017)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Code |
No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions (4582)
|
| Date of Event |
12/13/2021
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Malfunction
|
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
The patient's dob or age at time of event, gender, weight, ethnicity, and race are unknown.Patient information regarding relevant tests/ laboratory data or medical history are unknown.This information was not available from the facility.Report source: foreign - (b)(6).The angiosculpt device has not been returned by the facility, thus no returned product investigation was performed.The angiosculpt device was used off-label.The ifu warns to not exceed the rated burst pressure (14 atm).In addition, an undersized introducer sheath (5f) was used.The instructions for use indicates the device is compatible with a 6f introducer sheath as indicated on the product label.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
The angiosculpt device was used to treat a slightly calcified peripheral lesion.During the second inflation at 18 atm for 5 seconds, the balloon ruptured.The procedure was completed with a new angiosculpt device.No patient injury reported.This product problem is being submitted because the balloon ruptured above rbp.There is potential for harm if it were to recur.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
Block d9/g3: the angiosculpt device was returned for evaluation.Block g2 (correction): the initial mdr in section h11 indicated block g3.This was corrected to block g2.Block h3: visual inspection found a damaged distal bond with one leaflet lifted, but remained intact to the device.In addition, a longitudinal balloon tear on the entire length of the balloon was observed.Block h6: the ifu warns at least 99.9% of the balloons (with a 95% confidence level) will not burst at or below the rbp.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
Block h6: in supplemental mdr #1, investigation conclusion code 22 "known inherent risk of device" and ifu statement in section h11 was inadvertently entered; therefore, conclusion code 22 does not apply.The conclusion code 18 "failure to follow instructions" from the initial mdr remains appropriate.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|