|
The returned product was subjected to a detailed technical analysis and the corresponding production documentation was reviewed to establish whether a deviation from the manufacturing process could be the cause for the reported event.The technical investigation revealed that the device has fractured in at least two parts.Only the proximal device portion was returned.The proximal device portion (device hub, device shaft, inner shaft with both radiopaque markers, proximal balloon portion) has a length of 962 mm.The balloon has burst transversally.In close vicinity to the tearing edge, scratches were observed which have likely been caused by a hard, sharp-edged object such as e.G.Anatomical structure.The inner shaft is plastically deformed and has fractured about 6 mm distal to the distal radiopaque marker.The inner shaft diameter does not comply anymore with the specification.Also, the distal radiopaque marker is severely damaged.Both the introducer sheath and the guidewire used in the intervention were not returned.Review of the production documentation confirmed that the device was manufactured according to specifications and passed all in-process and final inspections.In addition to visual inspections each product is tested for air tightness by means of a pressure test and a helium leak test.Based on the conducted investigations of the device being subject to this complaint, no material or manufacturing related root cause could be determined.The most probable root cause for the balloon burst is related to the patient's anatomy.The balloon and the inner shaft most likely fractured as a consequence during withdrawal due to tensile overload.
|