| Model Number |
9010 |
| Medical Device Problem Code |
Device Markings/Labelling Problem (2911)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Code |
No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions (4582)
|
| Date of Event |
04/01/2025
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Malfunction
|
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
On (b)(6) 2025, it was reported that during an angioplasty procedure, the shaft length of the drug-coated balloon was allegedly not 75 cm as the package states.It was further reported that using a long sheath of 65 cm the balloon would not show in total and one of the dots was still lodged in the sheath.The procedure was completed using another device.There was no reported patient injury.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
H10: as the lot number for the device was provided, a review of the device history records is currently being performed.The return of the device is pending.The investigation of the reported event is currently underway.H11: section a through f ¿ the information provide by bd represents all the known information at this time.Despite good faith efforts to obtain additional information, the complainant/reporter was unable or unwilling to provide any further patient, product, or procedural details to bd.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
On (b)(6) 2025, a patient underwent a procedure using the lutonix 035av drug coated balloon (dcb) pta catheter.During the procedure, the shaft length of the balloon was allegedly not 75 cm as the package states.It was further reported that using a long sheath of 65 cm the balloon would not show in total and one of the dots was still lodged in the sheath.The procedure was completed using another device.There was no reported patient injury.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
H11: manufacturing review: the device history records have been reviewed, and this lot met all release criteria.Investigation summary: the physical device was not returned for evaluation.No photos were provided for review.Therefore, the investigation is inconclusive for the reported failure as no objective evidence was provided for review.A definitive root cause for the reported device markings/labeling problem could not be determined based upon the provided information.Labeling review: as the reported event did not allege a labeling or use related issue, a labeling review is not required.B5, d4(unique identifier (udi) #), g3, h4, h6 (method, result, conclusion).Section a through f: the information provide by bd represents all the known information at this time.Despite good faith efforts to obtain additional information, the complainant/reporter was unable or unwilling to provide any further patient, product, or procedural details to bd.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|