|
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.Based on the information provided, a definitive cause for the reported complaints could not be determined.It was reported by the account that the armada 35 balloon dilatation catheter (bdc) was attempted to be advanced into the introducer sheath for a second time.There was no damage noted to the device during inspection prior to use or during the first successful use of the device in the procedure, which suggests a product quality issue did not contribute to the reported difficulties.In this case, it may be possible that the balloon folds became compromised after the first inflation and removal causing difficulty during the attempt to re-insert the device for additional use.Additionally, it was reported that the device kept slipping during use which likely resulted from the patient¿s heavily calcified anatomy; however, this cannot be confirmed.There is no indication of a product quality issue with respect to the design, manufacture, or labeling of the device.
|
|
It was reported that a procedure was performed to treat a heavily calcified and tortuous lesion in the common iliac artery.After a non-abbott guidewire was used to cross the lesion, a 12x40mm armada 35 balloon dilatation catheter (bdc) was advanced to the lesion; however, it was noted to repeatedly slip during inflation.The aramda bdc was removed and replaced with a 8x20mm bdc and the procedure was continued.However, during an attempt to reinsert the aramda 35 bdc it was noted that the bdc could not be advanced through the 6f sheath.Therefore a new 12x20 armada 35 bdc was used and the procedure was completed.There were no adverse patient effects nor clinical delay.No additional information was provided.
|