|
It was reported that during endovascular embolization procedure in a patient, there was strong resistance when the subject coil was used with the microcatheter so an attempt was made to remove the subject coil, but it got stuck within the microcatheter.Excessive force was applied to retrieve the coil, but there was a feeling of prematurely detaching the subject coil in the microcatheter.Thus, the entire microcatheter was removed.The procedure was completed successfully by replacing both the devices.No clinical consequences were reported to the patient due to this event.
|
|
Due to the automated manufacturing execution system (mes) there are controls in the manufacturing process to ensure the product met specifications upon release.The subject device is not available; therefore, visual testing as well as functional testing cannot be performed.The reported event is covered in the device directions for use (dfu).As well, the risk of the reported event is documented in the risk documentation and there are current controls to mitigate the risk of the as reported event.The reported complaint could not be confirmed, and it could not be definitively determined if the device failed to meet specifications because the product was not returned.Additional information provided by the customer indicated that the device was confirmed to be in good condition during preparation/prior to use on the patient and was prepared as per the dfu, continuous flush was set up and maintained throughout the clinical procedure and no damage noted to the packaging prior to opening the packaging.While there are a number of potential causes for the reported issue, because review of available information failed to identify a definitive cause and the device was not returned for analysis, an assignable cause of undeterminable was assigned to the reported events of 'coil in catheter friction', 'coil jammed' and 'main coil prematurely detached/separated during use'.
|