| Catalog Number |
2156 |
| Medical Device Problem Code |
Failure to Seal (4070)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Code |
Hemorrhage/Blood Loss/Bleeding (1888)
|
| Date of Event |
09/09/2025
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Serious Injury
|
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
(b)(4).
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
It was reported that "when manta was deployed, we noticed a large amount of bleeding.The dr held pressure for 10 minutes and checked for pulses.There were pulses and after 10 minutes there was no bleeding.However, the dr decided to use ultrasound to check the site and saw that the manta device was fully inside of the vessel.So then decided to cutdown and remove manta and repair the artery.The patient was reported as fine post the procedure." additional information: during the procedure, micro puncture and ultrasound were utilized to gain lower access in the left common femoral artery.There was mild anterior calcification reported in the vessel.Measured depth for the manta was 2.5+1.40mg of protamine was administered during the procedure.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
It was reported that "when manta was deployed, we noticed a large amount of bleeding.The dr held pressure for 10 minutes and checked for pulses.There were pulses and after 10 minutes there was no bleeding.However, the dr decided to use ultrasound to check the site and saw that the manta device was fully inside of the vessel.So then decided to cutdown and remove manta and repair the artery.The patient was reported as fine post the procedure." additional information: during the procedure, micro puncture and ultrasound were utilized to gain lower access in the left common femoral artery.There was mild anterior calcification reported in the vessel.Measured depth for the manta was 2.5+1.40mg of protamine was administered during the procedure.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
(b)(4) complaint verification testing could not be performed as no sample was returned for analysis.A device history record review was performed, and no relevant findings were identified.As per the additional information received, the left common femoral artery was accessed using a micropuncture kit and ultrasound.Only one attempt was needed.The access location of the cfa was low.Mild calcification was noticed anterior in the vessel.No tortuosity was noted.The manta measurement depth was 2.5+1 cm.There were no issues with the procedure sheaths.An amplatz guidewire was used and there was no wire exchange prior to manta deployment.The procedure was performed per the ifu.40 protamine ivp was given.No resistance was experienced when advancing the bypass tube into the manta sheath.The patient outcome was fine and there was no patient harm.It was reported that after extended hemostasis was resolved using manual pressure, the physician used ultrasound to check the site and saw the manta device fully inside the vessel.It's possible that when applying manual pressure, the collagen could have been displaced and moved deeper into the vessel causing complete occlusion.Per customer information, surgical cutdown was performed, the manta was removed, and the artery was repaired.Without the device to evaluate, the complaint could not be confirmed, and the probable cause could not be determined from the available information.Teleflex will continue to monitor and trend for reports of this nature.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|