|
Visual inspection, functional testing, and scanning electron microscopy (sem) analysis were performed on the returned device.The reported balloon rupture was not confirmed.Return device analysis noted a tear in the inner and outer member on the distal shaft.Fluid leaked from the noted tear in the inner and outer member.In this case, it is likely that the noted tears on the inner and outer member is what the account perceived as the reported rupture since the device leaked and would not hold pressure.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.The balloon was sent to the scanning electron microscopy (sem) lab for further analysis.The sem report determined the outer member leak may be attributed to mechanical damage to the outer surface.Mechanically pinched material, damage and tearing were documented at the leak edges.Partial tearing on the inner surface adjacent to the leak was also observed.The inner member exhibited pinching, damage, delaminated material and tearing.Based on the reported information and the observations from the returned analysis, a definitive cause for the reported complaint, noted leak and tear in the inner and outer member could not be determined.In this case, it is possible that the device was inadvertently mishandled and/or interacted with lab equipment and/or accessory device during the procedure such that the inner and outer member became damaged (torn), which resulted in the noted leak and subsequently gave the impression of a balloon rupture; however, a conclusive cause cannot be determined since limited information was provided.There is no indication of a product quality issue with respect to the design, manufacture, or labeling of the device.
|