|
As reported, during an unspecified procedure, an advance 14 lp low profile balloon catheter's balloon ruptured.Access was obtained in the right common femoral artery to target a ninety-percent occluded lesion below the right knee.The anatomy was "lightly" calcified.The balloon was inflated to eight atmospheres, using an unspecified inflation device; however, the device ruptured.The balloon was not inflated within a stent.The balloon was not removed from the body and reinserted prior to inflation/rupture.The device packaging was not damaged.The balloon was removed by itself and another manufacturer's device was used to complete the procedure.A section of the device did not remain inside the patient¿s body.The patient did not require any additional procedures due to this occurrence.According to the initial reporter, the patient did not experience any adverse effects due to this occurrence.
|
|
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.
|
|
Summary of event: as reported, during an unspecified procedure, an advance 14 lp low profile balloon catheter's balloon ruptured.Access was obtained in the right common femoral artery to target a ninety-percent occluded lesion below the right knee.The anatomy was "lightly" calcified.The balloon was inflated to eight atmospheres, using an unspecified inflation device; however, the device ruptured.The balloon was not inflated within a stent.The balloon was not removed from the body and reinserted prior to inflation/rupture.The device packaging was not damaged.The balloon was removed by itself, and another manufacturer's device was used to complete the procedure.A section of the device did not remain inside the patient¿s body.The patient did not require any additional procedures due to this occurrence.According to the initial reporter, the patient did not experience any adverse effects due to this occurrence.Investigation evaluation: reviews of the complaint history, device history record, documentation, drawing, instructions for use (ifu), manufacturing instructions, specifications, and quality control procedures were conducted during the investigation.The complaint device was not returned to cook for investigation.A document-based investigation evaluation was performed.There have been no other reported complaints for this lot number.Two relevant non-conformances were noted on a subassembly lot; however, all affected product was scrapped and not replaced.The product ifu instructs the user to advance the balloon under fluoroscopy, ensuring that the wire guide does not protrude from the distal end of the sheath, and to carefully position the balloon across the lesion using the radiopaque balloon markers.The ifu instructs that if resistance is encountered while advancing the balloon catheter, the user should determine the cause and proceed with caution.The information provided upon review of the dmr, dhr, and ifu suggests that there is evidence the device was manufactured to specification.Although two relevant non-conformances were noted on a sub-assembly lot, all non-conforming product was scrapped, there are 100% inspections in place to capture this non-conformance, adequate inspection activities have been established, there is objective evidence that the dhr was fully executed, and no other lot-related complaints have been received from the field.Therefore, it was concluded that there is no evidence that non-conforming product exists 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 the patient¿s anatomy contributed to this event, as the lesion was 90% occluded and the anatomy was lightly calcified.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.
|