|
As reported, during a procedure involving treatment of the superficial femoral artery (sfa), a flexor ansel guiding sheath's hub leaked after/while another manufacturer's wire was inserted.A cook stent was also used through the sheath.The sheath hub did not leak while being flushed prior to use.Per the reporter, blood was "backing up" out of the proximal end of the sheath.Resistance was not felt during insertion or removal of any device through the sheath.The procedure was completed successfully with the sheath without any other intervention.Per the user, "the patient had nothing to do with the problem".A section of the device did not remain inside the patient's body.The patient did not require any additional procedures or experience any adverse effects due to the occurrence.
|
|
Summary of event: as reported, during a procedure involving treatment of the superficial femoral artery (sfa), a flexor ansel guiding sheath's hub leaked after/while another manufacturer's wire was inserted.A cook stent was also used through the sheath.The sheath hub did not leak while being flushed prior to use.Per the reporter, blood was "backing up" out of the proximal end of the sheath.Resistance was not felt during insertion or removal of any device through the sheath.The procedure was completed successfully with the sheath without any other intervention.Per the user, "the patient had nothing to do with the problem".A section of the device did not remain inside the patient's body.The patient did not require any additional procedures or experience any adverse effects due to the occurrence.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.The complaint device was not returned to cook for investigation.A document-based investigation evaluation was performed.A review of the device history record found one relevant non-conformance on one device from a sub-assembly lot; however, the affected product was scrapped.A review of complaint history found no additional complaints for this lot number.The product ifu cautions ¿all interventional or diagnostic instruments used with this product should move freely through the valve and sheath to avoid damage.¿ 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, and ifu suggests that there is evidence the device was manufactured to specification.Although one relevant non-conformance was noted on a sub-assembly lot, the non-conforming product was scrapped, there are 100% inspections in place to capture this non-conformance, adequate inspection activities have been established, there is objective evidence that the dhr was fully executed, and no other lot-related complaints have been received from the field.Therefore, it was concluded that there is no evidence that additional non-conforming product exists in-house or in the field.Based on the information provided and the results of the investigation, cook has concluded that a component failure contributed to this event.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.
|