| Model Number |
1012454-12 |
| Medical Device Problem Codes |
Difficult to Remove (1528); Material Separation (1562); Improper or Incorrect Procedure or Method (2017)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Code |
No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions (4582)
|
| Date of Event |
10/11/2022
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Serious Injury
|
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
(b)(4).The device is expected to be returned for investigation.It has not yet been received.A follow-up report will be submitted with all additional relevant information.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
It was reported that the procedure was a proximal optimisation technique (pot) to treat a lesion in the left main (lm) artery without calcification and mild tortuosity.The 4.5x12mm nc trek rx balloon dilatation catheter (bdc) advanced without resistance and was inflated at 14 atmospheres (atms).There was resistance during removal and the tip of the catheter was torn off [separated] but remained in the catheter.Force was applied.The separated tip together with the guide catheter and guide wire were removed as a unit by anchoring the distal part with another smaller balloon inside the guiding catheter.There was no adverse patient sequela and there was no clinically significant delay in the procedure.No additional information was provided.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
It was reported that the procedure was a proximal optimisation technique (pot) to treat a lesion in the left main (lm) artery with mild calcification and mild tortuosity.The 4.5x12mm nc trek rx balloon dilatation catheter (bdc) advanced without resistance and was inflated at 14 atmospheres (atms).There was resistance during removal and the tip of the catheter was torn off [separated] but remained in the catheter.Force was applied.The separated tip together with the guide catheter and guide wire were removed as a unit by anchoring the distal part with another smaller balloon inside the guiding catheter.There was no adverse patient sequela and there was no clinically significant delay in the procedure.Subsequent to the initially filed report, the following information was provided.The vessel was not calcified.No additional information was provided.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
Visual inspection was performed on the returned device.The reported separation was confirmed.The reported difficulty removing the device could not be replicated in a testing environment as it was based on operational circumstances.A review of the lot history record identified no manufacturing nonconformities issued to the reported lot that would have contributed to this event.Additionally, a review of the complaint history identified no other similar incidents and/or complaints from this lot.It was reported by the account that since resistance was met during attempts to remove the device, force was applied and the bdc separated.It should be noted that the coronary dilatation catheters (cdc), nc trek rx, global, instruction for use (ifu) states: if resistance is felt, determine the cause before proceeding.Continuing to advance or retract the catheter while under resistance may result in damage to the vessels and / or damage / separation of the catheter.In this case, it is likely that the violation of the ifu contributed to the reported separation as the device separated after force was applied.The investigation was unable to determine a conclusive cause for the reported difficulty removing the device; however, the reported separation appears to be related to user error/operational context.The unexpected medical intervention appears to be related to circumstances of the procedure.There is no indication of a product quality issue with respects to the design, manufacture, or labeling of this device.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|