| Catalog Number |
TG5412545 |
| Medical Device Problem Codes |
Expulsion (2933); Migration (4003)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Code |
No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions (4582)
|
| Date of Event |
09/15/2023
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Malfunction
|
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
H3 other text : the device is not available to the manufacturer.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
It was reported that during coil embolization for unruptured aneurysm procedure in the basilar artery, the operator placed the coil in the aneurysm and with the coil still being attached, the operator advanced the stent to the target site.After the stent was deployed, the coil was detached.Next, the subject coil was delivered into the aneurysm.When the operator heard the normal beep sound from the power supply which signaled a successful coil detachment, the delivery wire was retracted and the subject coil in the aneurysm moved during the retraction.Next, the third coil was advanced through the microcatheter, but due to big resistance during the delivery it was retracted together with the catheter.During the retrieval the coils moved to the area between the aneurysm.Angiography revealed that a wire was left in the vessel between the basilar artery and the vertebral artery.Surgical delay of 120 minutes was reported.The procedure was completed successfully.No further information available.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
It was reported that during coil embolization for unruptured aneurysm procedure in the basilar artery, the operator placed the coil in the aneurysm and with the coil still being attached, the operator advanced the stent to the target site.After the stent was deployed, the coil was detached.Next, the subject coil was delivered into the aneurysm.When the operator heard the normal beep sound from the power supply which signaled a successful coil detachment, the delivery wire was retracted and the subject coil in the aneurysm moved during the retraction.Next, the third coil was advanced through the microcatheter, but due to big resistance during the delivery it was retracted together with the catheter.During the retrieval the coils moved to the area between the aneurysm.Angiography revealed that a wire was left in the vessel between the basilar artery and the vertebral artery.Surgical delay of 120 minutes was reported.The procedure was completed successfully.No further information available.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
Due to the automated manufacturing execution system (mes) system there are controls in the manufacturing process to ensure the product met specifications upon release.During visual inspection the coil delivery wire was noted to be kinked.The main coil was not returned and looked like it was detached using an inzone.The coil introducer sheath was not returned.Functional inspection was not performed as the main coil 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.The reported event was not confirmed based on the device analysis.The device failed to meet specifications when received for complaint investigation based on the analyzed anomalies noted to the device.Additional information provided by the customer, the device was prepared for use as per the dfu.Continued flush was set up and maintained throughout the procedure.There was no damage noted to the packaging prior to opening the packaging.The customer also was concerned the coil was shorter than 3cm but could not be analysed to confirm this defect as it was not returned.The patient¿s anatomy was normal.During analysis the coil delivery wire was returned kinked and the main coil looked to be detected electronically and not returned for analysis.The coil introducer sheath was also not returned.An assignable cause of procedural factors will be assigned to the reported event ¿main coil migration¿ as these defects appears to be associated with a product that met stryker design and manufacturing specifications and was used in accordance with the dfu, but performance was limited due to procedural factors during use.An assignable cause of undeterminable was assigned to the reported event ¿main coil incorrect dimension¿ as the main was looked to be detached using an inzone and was not returned for analysis.An assignable cause of 'handling damage' will be assigned to the analysed event ¿coil delivery wire kinked/bent¿ as the defect appears to be associated with handling of the product or portion of the product during preparation.An assignable cause of procedural factors will be assigned to the analysed event ¿main coil prematurely detached/separated during use¿ as these defects appears to be associated with a product that met stryker design and manufacturing specifications and was used in accordance with the dfu, but performance was limited due to procedural factors during use.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|