| Model Number |
45-780308-L |
| Medical Device Problem Code |
Difficult or Delayed Separation (4044)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Code |
No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions (4582)
|
| Date of Event |
05/17/2024
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Malfunction
|
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
It was reported that during an embolization procedure, the coil was unable to detach using two different detachment controllers as they displayed a flashing red light.The coil was attempted to be removed, but it prematurely detached and remained implanted in a location that was not ideal, but acceptable.The procedure was completed successfully.There was no patient injury or intervention reported.This event had no impact on the patient.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
A search for non-conformances associated with this 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 implanted in the patient and will not be returned to the manufacturer for evaluation.A portion of the pusher was stated to be available for return to the manufacturer for evaluation but has not yet been returned.The alleged product issue could not be confirmed.If any portion of the device is received at a later date, an investigation will be performed and a supplemental mdr will be submitted.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
The investigation of the returned coil system found the pusher returned without the implant attached, but no indications of activation using a detachment controller was observed on the pusher heater coil.Further inspection found the pusher to be kinked at the distal section, and the lead wires to be separated from the core wire at the middle section of the pusher.The implant was not returned for evaluation as it remained in the patient as described in the reported event.The investigation found the pusher¿s monofilament with a tensile break shape at the tip, which is consistent with the device experiencing force that exceeded the strength of the monofilament causing the implant to separate from the pusher.The unit also passed continuity and resistance testing using an in-house detachment controller, indicating the device was capable of thermal detachment.However, the detachment controller used in the procedure was not returned, so the investigation could not determine if it had caused or contributed to the reported detachment issue.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.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|