|
As reported, during a percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (pta) and using a flexor raabe guiding sheath, there was leakage coming from the valve when the operator attempted to put liquid into the guiding sheath.They used another 4fr raabe sheath with the same lot number, and the leakage happened again.Onn their third try with a new 4fr raabe, there was no leakage.No unintended section of the device remained inside of the patient's body.No additional procedures were required due to the occurrence.No adverse effects were reported due to the occurrence.
|
|
Summary of event: as reported, during a percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (pta) and using a flexor raabe guiding sheath, there was leakage coming from the valve when the operator attempted to put liquid into the guiding sheath.They used another 4fr raabe sheath with the same lot number, and the leakage happened again.On their third try with a new 4fr raabe, there was no leakage.No unintended section of the device remained inside of the patient's body.No additional procedures were required due to the occurrence.No adverse effects were reported due to the occurrence.Investigation evaluation: reviews of the complaint history, device history record, instructions for use (ifu), manufacturing instructions, and quality control procedures were conducted during the investigation.The complaint device was not returned to cook for investigation.Cook completed a review of the device history record (dhr).The dhr for the reported lot found 1 relevant non-conformance on 1 device for failed leakage test, which was scrapped.A review of complaint history records shows no other related complaints associated with the complaint device lot.Although these non-conformances are relevant to the reported failure mode, all non-conforming product was scrapped, there are 100% inspections to capture this non-conformance.Adequate inspection activities have been established, there is objective evidence that the dhr was fully executed, and no other lot related complaints that have been received from the field, it was concluded that there is no evidence that non-conforming product exists in house or in field.A review of relevant manufacturing documents was conducted.It was concluded that the device aspect in question was functionally inspected by quality control and no notable gaps in production or processing controls were noted.There is no indication that a design or process related failure mode contributed to the reported event.Sufficient inspection activities are in place to identify this failure mode prior to distribution.The instructions for use (ifu) provides the following information to the user related to the reported failure mode: ¿sheath introduction¿ ¿using the side-arm of the valve, flush the sheath by filling the sheath assembly completely with heparinized saline.¿ ¿how supplied¿ ¿upon removal from package, inspect the product to ensure no damage has occurred.¿ cook has concluded a component failure contributed to this failure mode.The appropriate personnel have been notified and cook will continue to monitor for similar events.Per the quality engineering risk assessment, no further action is required.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.
|