|
Visual inspection was performed on the returned device.The reported balloon rupture and separation were confirmed.The reported difficulty advancing the device and entrapment of device could not be replicated in a testing environment as they were based on operational circumstances.Production record and corrective and preventative actions (capa) reviews were performed and revealed no indication of a product quality issue.Additionally, a review of the complaint history identified no other similar complaints from this lot.Based on the reported information and the observations from the returned analysis, the investigation determined that the reported balloon rupture, difficulty advancing the device, separation, entrapment of device, and unexpected medical intervention appear to be related to circumstances of the procedure.It was reported that the balloon dilatation catheter interacted with the patient¿s challenging anatomy resulting in the reported difficulty advancing the device.There was no leak noted during preparation, which suggests a product quality issue did not contribute to the reported difficulties.In this case, it is likely that the balloon interacted with the patient¿s challenging anatomy, such that the balloon became damages and ruptured.In addition, the resistance noted during removal was likely the result of the ruptured balloon material catching on the anatomy and/or accessory device during removal and becoming stuck.There is no indication of a product quality issue with respect to the design, manufacture, or labeling of the device.
|