|
The device was not received for investigation.However, the photos provided confirmed the report.Due to the nature of the device and the procedures it is being used for, the reported issue is a known complication of using the device.It is possible that procedural factors/anatomical features such as calcification, or plaque caused/contributed to the reported issue.As stated in the ifu, complications may occur during the use of embolectomy catheters.These may include intimal disruption, vessel wall perforation, balloon rupture with fragmentation, tip separation, local or systemic infection, arterial thrombosis, local hematomas, air embolus, rupture of an aneurysm, arterial spasm, distal embolus of blood clots or arteriosclerotic plaque, arterial dissection, and hemorrhage.Arterial rupture or balloon failure due to sharp calcified plaque may occur.The possibility of balloon rupture must be taken into account when considering the risks involved in the craterization procedure.The lot history record for the device was reviewed, no issues were found during manufacturing or packaging that would cause or contribute to the reported event.Note: this is report 3 of 3 related to the third catheter used in the event.
|
|
It was reported that after opening the packaging, the physician conducted a pre-use inspection before applying the device to the patient.This included balloon inflation and the injection of saline into the guidewire lumen.No issues were identified at that time, so he proceeded with the thrombectomy.After passing through the stenotic area and inflating the balloon to the specified volume, he attempted to withdraw the catheter.However, he noticed an unusual lack of resistance.When he tested balloon inflation outside the body, he found that the balloon had ruptured.No injury was reported to the patient.Note: this is report 3 of 3 related to the third catheter used in the event.
|