| Model Number |
IGW0028-30 |
| Medical Device Problem Codes |
Labelling, Instructions for Use or Training Problem (1318); Inaccurate Information (4051)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Code |
No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions (4582)
|
| Date of Event |
05/13/2024
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Malfunction
|
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
(4117) the device is not accessible for testing as it remained implanted in the patient.(4109/213) the review of historical data indicated that no similar complaint was reported for the same sterilization lot number 24a04.(3331/213) the device history records review concluded that no deviation was identified in relation with the reported event.(4118/3233) the type of investigation has not yet been determined.It is ongoing.(11) the investigation is still ongoing.A follow-up report will be sent upon completion of the investigation.The graft remained implanted.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
It was reported to intervascular that an intergard woven prothesis was implanted during an aortic dissection surgery performed on (b)(6) 2024.The prosthesis was implanted although the diameter of the prosthesis measured was greater (32 mm) than that indicated on the packaging (28 mm).The hospital reported that this did not cause a problem, and there was no harm to the patient.The hospital is accustomed to using these prostheses and this is the first time this has happened.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
Corrected data: on block h6, problem code "1318" has been updated to "4051" based on the investigation results described below.Additional manufacturer narrative: (3331/4245) a non-conformity report was opened in order to investigate and determine the root cause.A thorough review of the manufacturing data was conducted.The investigation concluded that a potential product inversion at the time of primary packaging can be considered.However, it is not possible to confirm this hypothesis and pursue the investigation further since no examination of the product could be performed as it remained implanted.Moreover, as of today, the hypothetically corresponding inverted product has been implanted with no complaint being reported regarding a mislabeling issue.(25/4315) the investigation concluded that it was not possible to identify the exact origin of the graft diameter mismatch reported by the customer.The conducted investigation concluded that the most probable hypothesis is a potential product inversion at the time of primary packaging, however, this cannot be confirmed as the device was not available for examination.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
Complaint #: (b)(4).
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|