|
As originally reported, during a procedure involving treatment of a malignant liver tumor, a roadrunner uniglide hydrophilic wire guide was not lubricious, resulting in resistance and a "rough" feeling.Reportedly, the wire was stuck within the protective sleeve and also difficult to withdraw from the hepatic artery.The user immediately stopped using the wire and replaced it with a different lot to continue the procedure.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.Upon return and initial evaluation of the device, a sticky substance flaked from the wire.
|
|
Blank fields on this form indicate the information is unknown or unavailable.E1: name and address - (b)(6) phone: (b)(6).H3: device evaluated by mfg = other (81) - device evaluation has begun; however, a conclusion is not yet available.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.
|
|
Blank fields on this form indicate the information is unknown, unchanged, or unavailable.Correction: d4 summary of event: as originally reported, during a procedure involving treatment of a malignant liver tumor, a roadrunner uniglide hydrophilic wire guide was not lubricious, resulting in resistance and a "rough" feeling.Reportedly, the wire was stuck within the protective sleeve and also difficult to withdraw from the hepatic artery.The user immediately stopped using the wire and replaced it with a different lot to continue the procedure.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.Upon return and initial evaluation of the device, a sticky substance flaked from the wire.Investigation evaluation: reviews of the complaint history, device history record (dhr), instructions for use (ifu), manufacturing instructions, and quality control procedures were conducted during the investigation.A visual inspection was conducted as well.The complaint device was returned to cook for investigation.There was a sticky substance flaking off from the wire guide (possibly dried hc coating).A document-based investigation evaluation was performed.A review of the device history record found no relevant non-conformances on the lot or the wire guide component lots.A review of complaint history found no additional complaints for this lot number.Cook also reviewed the product labeling, including the instructions for use (ifu).The device instructions for use (ifu) provides no relevant information to the user related to the reported failure mode.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, returned device, and complaint file suggests that there is evidence the device was manufactured to specification.There is no evidence of non-conforming devices in-house or in the field.Based on the information provided and the results of the investigation, cook has concluded that component failure unrelated to manufacturing or design deficiencies contributed to this incident.The returned device examination found that the coating was flaking off, which most likely led to the lack of hydrophilicity that the user experienced in this incident.The exact conditions experienced during the event cannot be duplicated.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.
|