| Model Number |
45-751019 |
| Medical Device Problem Code |
Premature Separation (4045)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Code |
No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions (4582)
|
| Date of Event |
07/07/2023
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Malfunction
|
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
A search for non-conformances associated with the reported part/lot number combination did not reveal any production-related issues relevant to the complaint that occurred during manufacturing of the device.The device was reported available for return for analysis, but has not yet been received; therefore, the alleged product issue cannot be confirmed at this time.If the device or additional information is received, a supplemental report will be submitted.The instructions for use (ifu) identifies premature or difficult coil detachment as potential complications associated with use of the device.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
It was reported that the procedure was an internal iliac embolization from ipsilateral access.A glide catheter was inserted into outflow vessel within internal iliac artery and was prepped and advanced.As coil was advancing into vessel it was not coiling as surgeon liked, he attempted to pull back and re-advanced, but it still did not pack properly.It was decided that coil may have been too large for space and should be removed.He noted that he could not pull back the coil and then the coil detached.A glide wire was inserted into the catheter to try and push the coil but was not able to go in very far as coil had stretched inside catheter.Catheter had to be removed and a new catheter was needed.Procedure completed successfully and patient transferred to recovery area.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
The investigation of the returned coil system found the implant severely stretched at the proximal section and separated from the pusher; however, no indications of activation using a detachment controller was found on the pusher heater coil.The investigation found the pusher's monofilament with a tensile break shape at the tip, which is consistent with the device experiencing excessive force that exceeded the strength of the monofilament causing the implant to separate from the pusher.The physical evaluation of the device could not identify the conditions or circumstances that led to the damage, but the damage is consistent with the device experiencing forces over specification.The microcatheter used in the procedure was also evaluated and found to be in good condition with no signs of damage/kinking.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|