|
There are controls in the manufacturing process to ensure the product met specifications upon release.The subject balloon catheter was not returned for analysis; therefore, physical as well as a functional testing could not be performed.The reported event is covered in the device direction for use (dfu).As well, the risk of the reported event is documented in the risk documentation and there are current controls to mitigate the risk of the as reported event.The reported complaint could not be confirmed, and it could not be definitively determined if the device failed to meet specifications, because the product was not returned.Addition information received indicated that the device was prepared for use as per the directions for use.The device was confirmed to be in good condition prior to use on the patient and the balloon was successfully inflated/deflated during preparation with no leakage noted.It was reported that 'the bgc was prepared according to the instruction for use (ifu) before being advanced into the patient.It was initially positioned at the petrous segment of internal carotid artery (ica), however, due to vasospasm, the physician repositioned the subject device to cervical ica.The balloon was inflated using 50/50 contrast-saline prior to retrieving of the clot.However, it ruptured when approx.0.5cc of 50/50 contrast saline was injected'.While there are a number of potential causes for the reported issue, because review and analysis of available information failed to identify a definitive cause and the device was not returned, an assignable cause of undeterminable will be assigned to this complaint.
|