| Model Number |
1013731 |
| Medical Device Problem Codes |
Peeled/Delaminated (1454); Difficult to Remove (1528)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Code |
No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions (4582)
|
| Date of Event |
04/17/2025
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Malfunction
|
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
Manufacturer's investigation is still pending at this time.Results and conclusions will be provided in the final report.The additional device referenced in b5 is filed under a separate medwatch number.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
It was reported that the procedure performed was to treat a moderately calcified superficial femoral artery (sfa) that is 100% stenosed.A ht command 18 guidewire was successfully advanced through a 6f slender sheath to the sfa by accessing the left dorsalis pedis, followed by an 18 non-abbott support catheter.Resistance was met with the catheter during removal of the ht command 18 guidewire and more force than usual was used to remove the wire.Once outside the anatomy, the coating at distal tip of the ht command 18 guidewire was noted to be peeled back.A second ht command 18 guidewire was advanced over the same non-abbott support catheter, and during removal, resistance was met with the catheter and the coating at distal tip of the ht command 18 guidewire was also noted to be peeled back after removal from the patient.Angio showed no signs of wire dislodgement.A non-abbott wire was then inserted and the non-abbott support catheter was removed.An orbital atherectomy system, non-abbott balloon dilatation catheter, and supera were used to complete the procedure.There were no adverse patient effects and no clinically significant delay in the procedure.No additional information was provided.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
A visual inspection was performed on the returned device.The reported peeled tip was confirmed as a separation was confirmed.The reported difficult to remove could not be tested due to the device condition.A review of the production records and the corrective and preventive actions (capa) database was performed and revealed no indication of a product quality issue.Additionally, a query of the complaint handling database for the reported lot revealed no indication of a lot specific issue.The investigation determined the reported difficulties appear to be related to the operational context of the procedure.It was reported that a guide catheter met resistance with the wire during removal, resulting in tip peeling.Analysis of the wire noted stretched coils, kinks, and confirmed the tip peeling as a tip separation.In this case, it is possible that the guide wire¿s tip sustained damage during use.Damage to the wire would impact its maneuverability through the catheter, contributing to resistance between the devices.Manipulation of the wire, when resistance was encountered likely contributed to the stretched coils and separation.There is no indication of a product quality issue with respect to manufacture, design, or labeling.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|