|
It was reported that the stent of a filiform double pigtail ureteral stent set had separated prior to use during a transurethral ureteroscopy with lithotripsy and stone removal on a female patient.When placing the stent, the user noted that one end of the stent was broken.The device was not used on the patient.The user changed to a new stent to complete the procedure.Per image provided by the user, one end of the stent appears to be separated from the main body of the device.As reported, the patient did not experience any adverse effects or require any additional procedures due to this occurrence.
|
|
Correction: d4 unique device identifier (udi) # investigation ¿ evaluation it was reported that the stent of a filiform double pigtail ureteral stent set had separated prior to use during a transurethral ureteroscopy with lithotripsy and stone removal on a female patient.When placing the stent, the user noted that one end of the stent was broken.The device was not used on the patient.The user changed to a new stent to complete the procedure.Per image provided by the user, one end of the stent appears to be separated from the main body of the device.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), quality control procedures, manufacturing instructions (mi), and instructions for use (ifu), as well as a visual inspection of the returned device, were conducted during the investigation.A device failure analysis was conducted at cook.The distal coil/pigtail was completely severed with the tether also broken.Given the appearance of the tether and the clean coil break edge, it appears possible that the user inadvertently broke the distal coil when removing the tether.Cook has concluded that the device was manufactured to specification.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 device history record and complaint history found no related discrepancies or additional complaints on the final or sub-assembly lots.Based on the available information, cook has concluded that there is no evidence suggesting nonconforming product exists either in house or in the field.Cook also reviewed product labeling.The product ifu, [t_dpss_rev2] ¿filiform double pigtail stent¿ contains the following information related to the reported failure mode.¿how supplied.Upon removal from the package, inspect the product to ensure no damage has occurred.¿ based on the information provided, inspection of the returned device, and the results of the investigation, the cause of the break appears to have been possibly from inadvertent user error when removing the tether.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 toa death or serious injury if a malfunction occurred.
|