|
E1: customer name and address = postal code: (b)(6).This report includes information known at this time.A follow-up report will be submitted should additional relevant information become available.This report is required by the fda under 21 cfr part 803 and is based on unconfirmed information submitted by others.Neither the submission of this report nor any statement contained herein is intended to be an admission that any cook device is defective or malfunctioned, that a death or serious injury occurred, nor that any cook device caused, contributed to, or is likely to cause or contribute to a death or serious injury if a malfunction occurred.
|
|
As reported, during an unknown procedure, an unspecified 0.018-inch wire perforated a cxi support catheter.The catheter was advanced through an unknown 4-french sheath.An ipsilateral approach was used, and the anatomy was very tortuous.At the beginning of the procedure, before crossing the stenosed area, the wire perforated the catheter on advancement, exiting the top ("anterior tip") of the catheter rather than the exit hole at the catheter tip.A section of the device did not remain inside the patient¿s body.The patient did not require any additional procedures due to this occurrence.According to the initial reporter, the patient did not experience any adverse effects due to this occurrence.
|
|
Blank fields on this form indicate the information is unknown, unchanged, or unavailable.Summary of event: as reported, during an unknown procedure, an unspecified 0.018-inch wire perforated a cxi support catheter.The catheter was advanced through an unknown 4-french sheath.An ipsilateral approach was used, and the anatomy was very tortuous.At the beginning of the procedure, before crossing the stenosed area, the wire perforated the catheter on advancement, exiting the top ("anterior tip") of the catheter rather than the exit hole at the catheter tip.A section of the device did not remain inside the patient¿s body.The patient did not require any additional procedures due to this occurrence.According to the initial reporter, the patient did not experience any adverse effects due to this occurrence.Investigation evaluation: reviews of the complaint history, device history record (dhr), instructions for use (ifu), and quality control procedures were conducted during the investigation.A visual inspection of the complaint device was also conducted.The complaint device was returned to cook for investigation.A puncture of the catheter material was found approximately 6 centimeters from the distal end of the strain relief.A document-based investigation evaluation was performed.A device history record review of the complaint lot found no relevant non-conformances.A review of the device history record for a component lot associated with the complaint lot found one relevant non-conformance on two devices; however, all affected product was scrapped prior to release.A review of complaint history found no additional complaints for this lot number.The customer followed all relevant instructions in the ifu related to this failure.A review of the device master record (dmr) concluded that sufficient inspection activities are in place to identify this failure mode prior to distribution.The information provided upon review of the dmr, dhr, ifu, and investigation of the returned device suggests that there is evidence the device was manufactured to specification.Although one relevant non-conformance was noted on a component lot, all non-conforming product was scrapped, there are 100% inspections in place to capture this non-conformance, adequate inspection activities have been established, there is objective evidence that the dhr was fully executed, and no other lot-related complaints have been received from the field.Therefore, it was concluded that there is no evidence that additional non-conforming product exists in house or in the field.Based on the information provided and the results of the investigation, cook has concluded that the patient's anatomy contributed to the device failure in this incident, as the complaint device was punctured by the wire guide in "very tortuous" anatomy.The risk analysis for this failure mode was reviewed and no additional escalation was required.The appropriate personnel have been notified and cook will continue to monitor for similar events.This report is required by the fda under 21 cfr part 803 and is based on unconfirmed information submitted by others.Neither the submission of this report nor any statement contained herein is intended to be an admission that any cook device is defective or malfunctioned, that a death or serious injury occurred, nor that any cook device caused, contributed to, or is likely to cause or contribute to a death or serious injury if a malfunction occurred.
|