|
As reported, an advance 18 lp low profile balloon catheter would not hold inflation.The balloon was negatively prepped prior to insertion but not inflated.Upon inflation under fluoroscopy, using another manufacturer's inflation device, the balloon would not reach the intended pressure, but partial inflation was noted.The device was removed and tested outside the patient's body, showing leakage and a drop in pressure due to a pinhole.A new balloon was used to complete the procedure.A section of the device did not remain inside the patient's body.The patient did not require any additional procedures.The patient did not experience any adverse effects due to the occurrence.
|
|
Summary of event: as reported, an advance 18 lp low profile balloon catheter would not hold inflation.The balloon was negatively prepped prior to insertion but not inflated.Upon inflation under fluoroscopy, using another manufacturer's inflation device, the balloon would not reach the intended pressure, but partial inflation was noted.The device was removed and tested outside the patient's body, showing leakage and a drop in pressure due to a pinhole.A new balloon was used to complete the procedure.A section of the device did not remain inside the patient's body.The patient did not require any additional procedures.The patient did not experience any adverse effects due to the occurrence.Investigation evaluation: reviews of the complaint history, device history record, drawings, instructions for use (ifu), quality control procedures, and specifications were conducted during the investigation.A visual inspection and functional test of the returned device were also conducted.The complaint device was returned to cook for investigation.The balloon was leaking near the proximal bond of the balloon.A review of the device history record found no non-conformances related to the reported failure mode.A review of complaint history records shows no other related complaints associated with the complaint device lot.Because there were no related non-conformances, 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 nonconforming product exists in house or in the 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.Cook also reviewed the device instructions for use (ifu), which warn, ¿if balloon pressure is lost and/or balloon rupture occurs, deflate balloon and remove balloon and sheath as a unit.¿ based upon the available information and results of the investigation, cook has concluded that a component failure unrelated to manufacturing contributed to this incident.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.
|