|
Catalog Number RBYLP0415 |
Device Problems
Failure to Advance (2524); Premature Separation (4045)
|
Patient Problem
No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions (4582)
|
Event Date 10/20/2022 |
Event Type
malfunction
|
Manufacturer Narrative
|
The device has been returned and the investigation results are pending.A follow up mdr will be submitted upon completion of the device investigation.
|
|
Event Description
|
The patient was undergoing a coil embolization procedure in the gastroduodenal artery (gda) using ruby coil lps and a non-penumbra microcatheter.During the procedure, the physician was unable to advance a ruby coil lp through the distal end of the microcatheter and into the target vessel.Therefore, the ruby coil lp was removed.The physician then attempted to advance a new ruby coil lp into the vessel; however, the same issue occurred.Consequently, the physician was manipulating the ruby coil lp when the coil unintentionally detached inside the microcatheter.Therefore, the physician used saline to push the detached ruby coil lp into the vessel.Subsequently, the physician advanced the next ruby coil lp, but the coil would not advance past the distal end of the microcatheter again; therefore, both the ruby coil lp and microcatheter was removed.The procedure was completed using ruby coils and a lantern delivery microcatheter (lantern).There was no report of an adverse effect to the patient.
|
|
Manufacturer Narrative
|
Evaluation of the returned ruby coil lp pusher assembly confirmed that the embolization coil was detached.Evaluation revealed a fracture on the pusher assembly.If the ruby coil lp is manipulated against resistance during use, damage such as a kink and subsequent fracture on the pusher assembly may occur.This damage likely contributed to the embolization coil detachment.The damage observed on the returned non-penumbra microcatheter likely contributed to the resistance during the procedure.Further evaluation of the device revealed kinks throughout the pusher assembly.Based on the returned condition, this damage was likely incidental to the complaint and likely occurred during packaging for the device return.Penumbra coils are visually inspected during in-process inspection and during quality inspection after manufacturing.The manufacturing records for this lot were reviewed and did not reveal any outstanding discrepancies, design, or quality concerns.
|
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|
|
|