|
(b)(6).Pma/510(k) number = k171999.This report includes information known at this time.A follow-up report will be submitted should additional relevant information become available.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.
|
|
As reported, during a procedure involving the great saphenous vein, the tip of a performer introducer split upon insertion of the device.The device was flushed with heparinized saline and the user attempted to insert the sheath and dilator over a wire guide into the distal great saphenous vein, at which point the tip of the sheath was noted to be split with sharp edges.The anatomy was moderately tortuous.The device was removed and replaced, and the procedure was completed.A section of the device did not remain inside the patient¿s body.There has been no report that the patient experienced any adverse effects or required any additional procedures due to this event.
|
|
Summary of event: as reported, during a procedure involving the great saphenous vein, the tip of a performer introducer split upon insertion of the device.The device was flushed with heparinized saline and the user attempted to insert the sheath and dilator over a wire guide into the distal great saphenous vein, at which point the tip of the sheath was noted to be split with sharp edges.The anatomy was moderately tortuous.The device was removed and replaced, and the procedure was completed.A section of the device did not remain inside the patient¿s body.There has been no report that the patient experienced any adverse effects or required any additional procedures due to this event.Investigation evaluation: reviews of the complaint history, device history record, drawing, instructions for use (ifu), and quality control procedures were conducted during the investigation.A visual inspection of the complaint device was also conducted.The complaint device was returned to cook for investigation.The sheath was folded in on itself; however, it was not split or torn as originally reported by the customer.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 states ¿upon removal from package, inspect the product to ensure no damage to product has occurred.¿ 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 a component failure unrelated to the design or manufacturing of the complaint device contributed to this incident.It is possible that the patient¿s anatomy could have contributed to this failure, but it cannot be definitively determined.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.
|