|
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.Potential complications as referenced on the ifu, include but are not limited to the following: hematoma at the site of entry, aneurysm rupture, emboli, vessel perforation, parent artery occlusion, hemorrhage, ischemia, vasospasm, clot formation, device migration or misplacement, premature or difficult device detachment, non-detachment, incomplete aneurysm filling, revascularization, post-embolization syndrome, and neurological deficits including stroke and death.The device has been returned to the manufacturer for evaluation.The investigation is ongoing.Upon completion of the investigation, a supplemental mdr will be submitted.
|
|
Items returned for evaluation: delivery system (pusher), web implant, introducer.Items not returned for evaluation: dispenser hoop, microcatheter, controller.The web implant was returned still attached to the pusher for analysis and was returned within the introducer.Upon inspection of returned items, the web implant was found to be within visual and dimensional specifications.However, the hypotube was found kinked at the hypotube to connector junction.The heater coil section was dissected to investigate any obstruction that could possibly prevent the implant from detaching, but the heater coil was not found stretched and did not show signs of activation using a detachment controller.Further inspection found the black lead wire broken at the distal solder joint.Tested the returned device with an in-house controller and gave red lights.The delivery system resistance was measured and found to be out of specification due to the broken lead wire.The investigation of the returned web system found the hypotube kinked at the hypotube to connector junction.The unit did not pass continuity and resistance testing.Further inspection of the pusher found the black lead wire broken at the distal solder joint, which is consistent with non-detachment.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.
|