|
Initial reporter occupation: urology operational manager.Device has been returned and preliminary evaluation has been performed, however, our investigation is ongoing and device evaluation summary will be included in our follow up report once our investigation has been completed.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.This report is based on unconfirmed information submitted by others.Neither the submission of this report nor any statement made in it is intended to be an admission that any cook device is defective or malfunctioned; that a death or serious injury occurred; or that any cook device caused or contributed to; or is likely to cause or contribute to a death or serious injury if a malfunction occurred.
|
|
As reported, during a ureteroscopy with laser, the inner stylet of a flexor parallel ureteral access sheath and dilators set split early, and another manufacturer's wire "popped off".The device was placed via rapid technique and advanced without difficulty when the failure occurred.The release of the wire was abrupt and occurred before the stylet was removed from the sheath.A section of the device did not remain inside the patient's body.The patient did not require any additional procedures due to the occurrence.According to the initial reporter, the patient did not experience any adverse effect.
|
|
Event summary as reported, during a ureteroscopy with laser, the inner stylet of a flexor parallel ureteral access sheath and dilators set split early, and another manufacturer's wire "popped off".The device was placed via rapid technique and advanced without difficulty when the failure occurred.The release of the wire was abrupt and occurred before the stylet was removed from the sheath.A section of the device did not remain inside the patient's body.The patient did not require any additional procedures due to the occurrence.According to the initial reporter, the patient did not experience any adverse effect.Investigation - evaluation reviews of the complaint history, device history record, instructions for use, and quality control procedures and a visual inspection and functional test of the device were conducted during the investigation.The device was returned for investigation in an opened, labeled package.A visual inspection of the split did not observe any damage or defects.The split from the skive to the end hole was not separated.A 0.035" wire guide was inserted, it did not come through the split easily.A document-based investigation evaluation was performed.No related non-conformances were recorded.No additional complaints were received for this product lot.The device history record review provides objective evidence that the device was manufactured to specification.There is no evidence of nonconforming devices from the complaint lot 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.The device is provided with instructions for use which caution, ¿during placement, the likelihood of the device slipping off the wire guide increases if a soft wire guide is used.A stiff wire guide is required for best performance.¿ the information supplied by the user stated another manufacturer's wire guide was used.As the physical characteristics of the wire guide are not known, it could not be determined if the wire guide was considered a stiff or soft wire guide.Based on the available information, cook has concluded that the cause of the event could not be determined.Cook will continue monitoring of similar complaints and has notified the appropriate personnel of this event.Per a review of risk documentation, 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.
|