|
As reported, during an interventional procedure of the right superficial femoral artery, the hub separated from a micropuncture transitionless stiffened cannula access set¿s outer catheter/cannula.Resistance was encountered upon both insertion and removal of the device through the left common femoral artery, as the access site was scarred due to multiple past interventions.An unspecified cook bentson wire was used with the device, which did not kink.It is unknown if the complaint device was advanced through any previously placed closure devices.Upon removal of the catheter/cannula from the patient, the hub separated.Per the reporter, no additional devices were required, as the device had served its purpose.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.
|
|
Summary of event: as reported, during an interventional procedure of the right superficial femoral artery, the hub separated from a micropuncture transitionless stiffened cannula access set¿s outer catheter/cannula.Resistance was encountered upon both insertion and removal of the device through the left common femoral artery, as the access site was scarred due to multiple past interventions.An unspecified cook bentson wire was used with the device, which did not kink.It is unknown if the complaint device was advanced through any previously placed closure devices.Upon removal of the catheter/cannula from the patient, the hub separated.Per the reporter, no additional devices were required, as the device had served its purpose.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, instructions for use (ifu), and quality control procedures were conducted during the investigation.A visual inspection of the complaint device was also conducted.The used complaint device was returned to cook for investigation.The hub was separated from the 4-french outer catheter.The catheter shaft measured 14.5-centimeters.A document-based investigation evaluation was performed.No related non-conformances were found, and there have been no other reported complaints for this lot number.The product ifu instructs: ¿do not attempt to insert or withdraw the wire guide and/or introducer if resistance is felt.¿ the information provided upon review of the dmr, dhr, ifu, and investigation of the returned device 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 patient anatomy contributed to this event, as the anatomy was scarred, and the sheath material was stretched near the hub, confirming the reported resistance encountered during the procedure.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.
|