|
Patient identifier: not provided, maude report.Patient age & date of birth: not provided, maude report.Patient weight: not provided, maude report.Patient ethnicity: not provided, maude report.Patient race: not provided, maude report.Implanted date: device was not implanted.Explanted date: device was not explanted.Initial reporter establishment name and address: not provided, maude report.Initial reporter name: not provided, maude report.Initial reporter phone number: not provided, maude report.Initial reporter health professional: not provided, maude report.Initial reporter occupation: not provided, maude report.The actual device was not available; therefore, the actual device will not be returned for evaluation.The investigation is currently ongoing.A follow-up report will be submitted once the investigation is complete.
|
|
A maude database search conducted on 30 oct 2022 found a maude report number 15484674.The event description states: while using the catheter in cath lab, the patient moved suddenly and the distal 3/5 of the catheter sheared off and lodged in the patient's iliac artery.The interventionalist had great difficulty retrieving the catheter piece and the patient reached maximum or near maximum radiation exposure.The physician felt it was safe to leave and return to attempt retrieval another day.The retrieval was successful.The patient came into the hospital in extremis, but this catheter event did not exacerbate her clinical condition.
|
|
This report is being submitted as follow-up no.1 to provide the completed investigation results.The actual device was not returned; therefore, an evaluation of the actual device was unable to be conducted.The complaint cannot be confirmed since the device was not available for evaluation.With the very limited information provided, it is unclear how the sheath shaft could have separated from the hub.In the absence of the device or additional information, the exact root cause cannot be determined.The likely root cause is that the patient's movement caused the sheath to separate.Review of device history record (dhr) showed there were no issues noted during manufacture of the product that could have contributed to this complaint condition.Currently no action is recommended since this risk evaluation is within the predetermined limits in the failure mode and effects analysis (fmea).
|