|
The device was not returned for analysis.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.There was no leak noted during preparation, which suggests a product quality issue did not contribute to the reported difficulty.Based on the information received, the investigation determined that the reported complaints appear to be related to operational context.There was no leak noted during preparation, which suggests a product quality issue did not contribute to the reported difficulty.In this case, it is likely that the balloon interacted with the moderately calcified anatomy such that the balloon became damaged and subsequently ruptured during inflation.There is no indication of a product quality issue with respect to the design, manufacture, or labeling of the device.
|
|
It was reported that the procedure performed was to treat a de novo, moderately calcified, moderately tortuous external iliac artery.An unspecified guidewire was placed and an 8.0x40mm armada 35 balloon dilatation catheter was traversed; however, resistance with anatomy was felt.Once at the lesion the armada balloon ruptured during the second inflation at nominal pressure as it was noted the lesion was tighter than expected.An unspecified drug coated balloon (dcb) was used to complete the procedure.There were no adverse patient effects and no clinically significant delay in the procedure.No additional information was provided.
|