|
Due to the automated manufacturing execution system (mes) system there are controls in the manufacturing process to ensure the product met specifications upon release.The subject device is not available; therefore, visual and functional testing as well as physical analysis cannot be performed.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.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.Additional information provided by the customer indicated the device was confirmed to be in good condition prior to use, preparation/set-up was performed as per the directions for use and continuous flush was maintained for the duration of the procedure.No excessive force was applied at any point while advancing the stent within the microcatheter.The outer diameter of the guidewire used was 14, the id of the guide catheter used was 058.The delivery catheter and pusher were purged with sterile saline and it was verified that fluid exited the end of the delivery catheter and pusher.The position of the delivery catheter was confirmed by visualizing the radiopaque markers and the position of the flow diverter implant was confirmed between the two marker bands.There was no resistance between the delivery catheter and the pusher, there was no resistance encountered during navigation of the flow diverter device to the target lesion, there was no resistance encountered during the flow diverter deployment and there was no resistance during advancement of the flow diverter delivery system through the patient¿s anatomy.The anatomy was not tortuous.The procedure was completed successfully with use of another flow diverter device.There was no impact to the patient as a result of the event.The size of the stent was appropriate for the treatment site.The condition being was aneurysm, the anatomical location of the treatment site was the ica.The physician alleges there was a malfunction of a device for this procedure.There was not a high % stenosis proximal to the flow diverter likely contributing to the inability to deploy the flow diverter.While there are a number of potential causes for the reported issue, because review and analysis of available information failed to identify a definitive cause, a cause of undeterminable was assigned to the reported issue of stent failed/unable to open.
|