|
As reported, during an arterial intervention procedure a performer introducer cracked.Resistance was noted during the puncture process.After removing the sheath, the tip was noted to be cracked.A new sheath was used to replace it.The procedure was completed as normal.A section of the device did not remain inside the patient¿s body.The patient did not require any additional procedures due to this occurrence.According to the initial reporter, the patient did not experience any adverse effects due to this occurrence.Additional patient and event information has been requested.
|
|
Blank fields on this form indicate the information is unknown, unchanged, or unavailable.Summary of event: as reported, during an arterial intervention procedure, a performer introducer cracked.Resistance was noted during the puncture process.After removing the sheath, the tip was noted to be cracked.A new sheath was used to replace it.The procedure was completed as normal.A section of the device did not remain inside the patient¿s body.The patient did not require any additional procedures due to this occurrence.According to the initial reporter, the patient did not experience any adverse effects due to this occurrence.Investigation evaluation: reviews of the complaint history, device history record, manufacturing instructions, and quality control procedures were conducted during the investigation.The complaint device was not returned to cook for investigation.A document-based investigation evaluation was performed.No related non-conformances were found.One additional complaint was found on this lot; however, the complaint was reported at the same time by the same customer, with no additional information provided.The information provided upon review of the dmr and dhr suggests that there is evidence the device was manufactured to specification.There is no evidence of non-conforming devices in-house or in the field.Cook has concluded that sufficient inspection activities are in place to identify this failure mode prior to distribution.Based on the information provided and the results of the investigation, cook has concluded that a component failure unrelated to manufacturing contributed to this incident.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.
|