| Model Number |
1012276-20 |
| Medical Device Problem Codes |
Difficult to Remove (1528); Material Separation (1562); Difficult to Advance (2920)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Code |
No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions (4582)
|
| Date of Event |
03/15/2023
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Malfunction
|
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
Manufacturer's investigation is still pending at this time.Results and conclusions will be provided in the final report.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
It was reported that the procedure was to treat a moderately calcified, mildly tortuous, 80% stenosed lesion in the left anterior descending (lad) artery.A 3.50x20mm trek balloon dilatation catheter (bdc) was advanced to the lesion with resistance from the anatomy and used without issue.The bdc was removed with slight resistance from the anatomy when the shaft of the device separated in the guide catheter (gc).All the separated segments were removed inside of the guide catheter, no part of the device was left inside of the anatomy.There were no reported adverse patient effects and no clinically significant delays in the procedure.No additional information was provided.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
Visual inspection was performed on the returned device.The reported separation was confirmed.The reported difficulty advancing and removing the device from the anatomy 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.The investigation determined the reported complaint appears to be related to circumstance of the procedure.There was no damage noted to the device during the inspection prior to use, which suggests a product quality issue did not contribute to the reported difficulties.It was reported by the account that the bdc interacted with the moderately calcified and mildly tortuous anatomy resulting in the reported difficult advancing and removing the device from the anatomy.Additionally, it was reported that the bdc was used successfully to treat the lesion without issue.Return analysis noted the shaft material at the separation was stretched and uneven which suggests that the separation may be related to tensile overload (material stress/fatigue).In this case, it is likely that the bdc interacted with the patient¿s challenging anatomy, as resistance was encountered during removal and the shaft ultimately separated.There is no indication of a product quality issue with respects to the design, manufacture, or labeling of the device.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|