|
E1: customer (person): street: (b)(6).G4: pma/510(k) #: preamendment.H3: device evaluated by mfg? device evaluation is anticipated but has not yet begun.This report includes information known at this time.A follow-up report will be submitted should additional, relevant information become available.This report is required by the fda under 21 cfr part 803 and is based on unconfirmed information submitted by others.Neither the submission of this report nor any statement contained herein is intended to be an admission that any cook device is defective or malfunctioned or that a death or serious injury occurred; nor is it admission that any cook device caused, contributed to, or is likely to cause or contribute to a death or serious injury if a malfunction occurred.
|
|
It was reported that a nester platinum embolization microcoil was difficult to advance.During the procedure, the coil was loaded into the microcatheter and pushed with a wire guide to end of the catheter where it partially exited the distal tip but became stuck.Multiple attempts to deploy the coil from the catheter were made but resistance was encountered.Eventually the wire guide became stuck and could not be withdrawn from the catheter.A result, the catheter, wire guide, and coil were removed, and the procedure was completed with new product.It was noted that the catheter was flushed prior to each coil deployment.As reported, the patient did not experience any adverse effects or require any additional procedures due to this occurrence.
|
|
Correction: d4 - primary udi number.Additional information: d9 - date returned to mfg.Investigation ¿ evaluation: it was reported that a nester platinum embolization microcoil was difficult to advance.During the procedure, the coil was loaded into the microcatheter and pushed with a wire guide to the end of the catheter where it partially exited the distal tip but became stuck.Multiple attempts to deploy the coil from the catheter were made but resistance was encountered.Eventually the wire guide became stuck and could not be withdrawn from the catheter.A result, the catheter, wire guide, and coil were removed, and the procedure was completed with new product.It was noted that the catheter was flushed prior to each coil deployment.As reported, the patient did not experience any adverse effects or require any additional procedures due to this occurrence.Reviews of documentation including the complaint history, device history record (dhr), and quality control procedures, as well as a visual inspection and functional test of a returned unused device, were conducted during the investigation.Cook received one device in an unused and sealed condition from the same lot as the complaint device.There was no damage noted to the unused coil that was returned.The returned device was tested using a sample catheter and deployed without issue.Additionally, a document-based investigation evaluation was performed.A review of the device master record (dmr) concluded that sufficient inspection activities are in place to identify this failure mode prior to distribution.A review of the dhrs for the reported complaint device lot and the related subassembly lots revealed five possibly related in process quality discrepancies in which all discrepant product was scrapped.A complaint history search identified no other events reported for the related failure mode.Based on the available information, cook has concluded that the device was manufactured to specification and that there is no evidence suggesting nonconforming product exists either in house or in the field.The manufacturer does not apply an ifu for this product.Instructions for use are applied by the local distribution partner.Based on the information provided, inspection of the returned unused device, and the results of the investigation, cook has concluded that component failure unrelated to manufacturing or design deficiencies contributed to this incident.It is possible that the wrong sized catheter was used, but due to a lack of information this could not be definitively confirmed.The appropriate personnel have been notified.Cook will continue to monitor for similar complaints.Per the risk assessment no further action is required.This report is required by the fda under 21 cfr part 803 and is based on unconfirmed information submitted by others.Neither the submission of this report nor any statement contained herein is intended to be an admission that any cook device is defective or malfunctioned, that a death or serious injury occurred, nor that any cook device caused, contributed to, or is likely to cause or contribute to a death or serious injury if a malfunction occurred.
|