|
Items returned for evaluation: implant; introducer.Items not returned for evaluation: pusher; shrink lock; dispenser hoop; microcatheter; v-grip.The implant was returned stretched, entangled and separated from the pusher.The pusher was not returned for evaluation.The introducer was returned undamaged.The introducer distal tip was found to be within specification (img b) (spec= 0.0180" -0.0005/+0.001 per pd (b)(4), dash # -03, dim a).Inspection of the implant found the monofilament broken, which indicates the device experienced a tensile break.The reported complaint is confirmed.The investigation of the returned coil system found the implant stretched, entangled, and separated from the pusher.The pusher was not returned for evaluation.Further inspection of the implant found the 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 returned, so the investigation could not determine if it had caused or contributed to the reported complaint.H11 - corrections: sections d1, d2, d3, d4.
|