| Model Number |
N/A |
| Medical Device Problem Code |
Break (1069)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Code |
Foreign Body In Patient (2687)
|
| Date of Event |
06/12/2023
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Serious Injury
|
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
The user facility reported that a right lower extremity (rle) angiogram was performed, upon closing a regular 6 french sheath attempted removal resulted in a sheath breaking in half.The sheath separated in the middle; the part attached to hub was removed safely.Approximately 5cm of segment remained behind in the patient's common femoral artery.Physician accessed an 8 french pinnacle sheath on the contralateral side to snare out however it was unsuccessful.Patient was then transferred to a cath lab where an additional percutaneous procedure was performed and resulted in a successful removal.Patient was in stable condition.The event occurred post-treatment.There is a direct allegation that the reported device caused or contributed to patient injury and/or need for medical intervention.Additional information received 16 jun 2023: two separate sheaths were used on same procedure.Additional information received 22 jun 2023: there was not a difficult patient anatomy (resistance) experienced during removal that may have contributed to the broken sheath based on the angiogram.There was not any difficulty introducing the device for the procedure.The problem occurred after intervention was complete without issue.Removal of sheath was done in a surgical setting at a different location.The intervention involved in the percutaneous procedure for removal was an 8 french sheath accessed the right superficial femoral artery (sfa) and a 035 glidewire advanced up into the aorta.A snare was introduced alongside the wire and the capture of original sheath remnant was obtained successfully.The sheath and snare were removed, and closure was performed over a 035 glide to successfully complete the case.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
D6a: implanted date: device was not implanted.D6b: explanted date: device was not explanted.The actual device was not available for returned; therefore, an evaluation of the actual device will not be conducted.The investigation is currently ongoing.A follow-up report will be submitted once the investigation is complete.A review of the device history record of the product code/lot# combination was conducted with no findings.This report is for the first device reported, for the second device reported that was used on the same patient see mdr 1118880-2023-00350.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
Additional information was received on 01 aug 2023: the procedure was a left heart catheterization, so only wires and catheters were passed through the sheath.The patient did have some scarring around the access site from previous procedures.There was minimal resistance, however nothing that should have caused the sheath to separate the way it did.The body of the sheath seemed very thin and weak compared to other sheaths we have used previously.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
This report is being sent as follow-up # 1 to provide additional information in section b5 and 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 for sheath separation because the sample was not returned for assessment.Without a sample, the exact root cause could not be determined.It is possible the increased resistance due to scarring at the access site led to the sheath breakage.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 design failure mode and effects analysis (dfmea).
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|