|
As reported, during an unknown procedure, the tip of a triforce peripheral crossing set broke.Per the reporter, the tip appears to be partially attached.A section of the device did not remain inside the patient¿s body.The patient did not require any additional procedures or experience any adverse effects due to this event.Additional information has been requested.Upon return and initial evaluation of the complaint device, the tip of the sheath was separated.
|
|
H3: device evaluated by mfg: device evaluation has begun; however, a conclusion is not yet available.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, 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.
|
|
Blank fields on this form indicate the information is unknown, unchanged, or unavailable.Summary of event: as reported, during an unknown procedure, the tip of a triforce peripheral crossing set broke.Per the reporter, the tip appears to be partially attached.A section of the device did not remain inside the patient¿s body.The patient did not require any additional procedures or experience any adverse effects due to this event.Additional information was requested.Upon return and initial evaluation of the complaint device, the tip of the sheath was separated.Corrected information: d4 (udi), h6 (annex g).Investigation evaluation: reviews of the complaint history, device history record (dhr), instructions for use (ifu), and quality control procedures were conducted during the investigation.A visual inspection of the complaint device was also conducted.The complaint device was returned to cook for investigation.The cxi catheter was returned within the sheath.Approximately 0.5-centimeters of the sheath tip was separated/missing.No damage was noted to the catheter tip.A document-based investigation evaluation was performed.A review of the device history record and complaint history found no discrepancies or additional relevant complaints on the final or sub-assembly lots.The product ifu states ¿the device should not be forced through an area of resistance unless the source of resistance is identified by fluoroscopy and appropriate steps are taken to reduce or remove the obstruction.¿ a review of the device master record (dmr) concluded that sufficient inspection activities are in place to identify this failure mode prior to distribution.The information provided upon review of the dmr, dhr, ifu, and investigation of the returned device suggests that there is evidence the device was manufactured to specification.Based on the information provided and the results of the investigation, cook has concluded that a component failure, unrelated to manufacturing or design deficiencies, contributed to this event.The risk analysis for this failure mode was reviewed, and no additional escalation was required.The appropriate personnel have been notified, and cook will continue to monitor for similar events.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.
|