| Model Number |
GS-R6ST1C75W |
| Medical Device Problem Codes |
Break (1069); Difficult to Remove (1528); Physical Resistance/Sticking (4012)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Codes |
Hemorrhage/Blood Loss/Bleeding (1888); Foreign Body In Patient (2687)
|
| Date of Event |
09/02/2024
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Serious Injury
|
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
The user facility reported that they had an aortic stenosis pressure gradient procedure.The operator advanced the initial 6fr glidesheath slender into the radial artery then swapped for a 75cm destination slender.Advanced pigtail past the aortic valve to take simultaneous pressures.Once finished, they went ahead and tried to remove the sheath without dilator.Radial spasm occurred and operator tried to sedate patient, administered nitro and additional cocktails, put under general anesthesia however, no luck in relieving the spasm.After two hours the sheath seemed to move a bit, and they tried to pull it out.Sheath pulled out but stainless-steel coils remained inside the body.The patient was sent to surgery for cut-down removal.They did not measure the radial artery going in and turned out to be a tortuous high radial brachial take-off where the sheath seemed to have kinked and got stuck.The surgery was successful.Additional information was received on 16sept2024: the patient was doing fine, and blood loss was less than 250cc.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
A1: patient identifier: requested, not provided due to hospital policy.A2: age & date of birth: requested, not provided due to hospital policy.A3a: sex: requested, not provided due to hospital policy.A3b: gender: requested, not provided due to hospital policy.A4: weight: requested, not provided due to hospital policy.A5: ethnicity: requested, not provided due to hospital policy.A6: race: requested, not provided due to hospital policy.D6a: implanted date: device was not implanted.D6b: explanted date: device was not explanted.E3: occupation: clinical coordinator.The actual device is not available for return.The investigation is currently ongoing.A follow-up report will be submitted once the investigation is complete.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
This report is being sent as follow-up no.1 to provide the completed investigation results.The actual device was not returned; therefore, an evaluation of the actual device was unable to be conducted.The complaint cannot be confirmed for sheath separation because a sample was not returned for assessment.Without a sample, the exact root cause cannot be determined.The likely root cause is the sheath was attempted to be removed in the face of resistance due to tortuosity in the artery and vascular spasm.Additionally, the dilator was not reinserted during removal which can assist with withdrawal of the sheath.The r2p instructions for use (ifu) was reviewed, and it states: "caution: while inserting or withdrawing, if resistance is met, do not advance or withdraw the sheath until the cause of resistance has been determined." review of the device history record (dhr) showed there were no issues noted during the manufacture of the product that could have contributed to this complaint condition.Currently no action is recommended since this risk evaluation is within the predetermined limits in the hazard based risk table (hbrt).
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|