MAUDE Adverse Event Report: MEDOS INTERNATIONAL SARL CERENOVUS ENTERPRISE; INTRACRANIAL NEUROVASCULAR STENT

Catalog Number	ENCR402312
Medical Device Problem Code	Failure to Advance (2524)
Health Effect - Clinical Code	No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions (4582)
Date of Event	09/25/2025
Type of Reportable Event	Malfunction
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
Manufacturer's reference #: (b)(4).Information regarding patient weight, height, medical history, race, and ethnicity was not reported.Section e1.Initial reporter phone: (b)(6).Section h3 - the device is available to be returned for evaluation and testing.However, it has not been received to date.If the device returns, a device investigation will be performed.Missing information from this report is identified as blank; this information was not provided in the reported event or available at the time of report submission.The company is seeking this information through the event investigation.This report is being submitted pursuant to the provisions of 21 cfr, part 803.This report may be based on information which has not been investigated or verified prior to the required reporting date.This report does not reflect a conclusion by cerenovus, or its employees that the report constitutes an admission that the product, cerenovus, or its employees caused or contributed to the potential event described in this report.If information is obtained that was not available for the initial report, a follow-up report will be filed as appropriate.
Event or Problem Description
A healthcare professional reported that during an endovascular embolization, a 4 mm x 23 mm enterprise2 vascular reconstruction device (encr402312, 9493891) was impeded in the microcatheter hub of a prowler select plus 150/5 cm microcatheter (606s255x, 31561630) and could not advance any more.The doctor only retracted the stent alone and switched to a second stent, the second stent was with the same issue.The doctor removed the second stent and microcatheter (mc) from the patient and found the section near the microcatheter hub was kinked/bent.The doctor switched to a second new microcatheter to deliver the original second stent to complete the procedure.The surgery was prolonged by about 10 minutes.There was no patient injury reported.The outer packaging and the device were inspected and found in good condition prior to the procedure.
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
Manufacturer ref#(b)(4).Updated sections on this medwatch: b4, d9, g3, g6, h2, h3 and h11.The product has been returned for evaluation and testing; however, the engineering evaluation has not been completed.A supplemental report will be submitted if new facts arise which materially alter information submitted in a previous mdr report.
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
Manufacturer ref (b)(4).Updated sections on this medwatch: b4, b5, g3, g6, h2, and h11.Section b5: additional event information received on 03-nov-2025 indicated that they were not able to torque the device.There was no evidence of physical material within the devices.The microcatheter did no kink/bent.There was no excessive force used with the devices.The 10 minutes procedural delay did not result in a patient adverse consequence.A supplemental report will be submitted if new facts arise which materially alter information submitted in a previous mdr report.
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
Manufacturer ref# (b)(4).Updated sections on this medwatch: b4, g3, g6, h2, h3, h6 and h11.Complaint conclusion: a healthcare professional reported that during an endovascular embolization, a 4mmx23mm enterprise2 vascular reconstruction device (encr402312, 9493891) was impeded in the microcatheter hub of a prowler select plus 150/5cm microcatheter (606s255x, 31561630) and could not advance any more.The doctor only retracted the stent alone and switched to a second stent, the second stent was with the same issue.The doctor removed the second stent and microcatheter (mc) from the patient and found the section near the microcatheter hub was kinked/bent.The doctor switched to a second new microcatheter to deliver the original second stent to complete the procedure.The surgery was prolonged by about 10 minutes.There was no patient injury reported.The outer packaging and the device were inspected and found in good condition prior to the procedure.The device was returned to j&j medtech for further evaluation.A non-sterile 4mmx23mm enterprise2 vascular reconstruction device was received contained in the decontamination pouch.Upon receiving the device, visual inspection was performed, and the stent component was detached from the delivery system.No appearance of damages was observed.Microscopic inspection was performed on the stent component.It was observed to be in good condition; there was no structural damage (i.E., no broken struts, no kinks); also, it was noted fully expanded, both ends can be noted as completely flared.A device history record (dhr) was performed and it indicated this product was final inspection tested at lake region medical and was determined to be acceptable.The issue reported regarding the impeded condition could not be evaluated due to the stent detachment.In order to perform a functional test, the stent must be attached to the delivery system and inside the introducer.None of the returned components present damages that suggest that they were forcibly advanced.With the limited information available, a conclusive cause cannot be determined; however, it is possible that clinical and procedural factors, including device manipulation and operator's technique, may have contributed to the reported failure.At this time, there is no evidence to support that the issue reported in the complaint is a result of a defect inherently related to the device.The stent detachment was not originally reported in the complaint, therefore, the exact time when this condition occurred cannot be determined.This condition is not considered related to the reported issue.As part of the j&j medtech quality process, all devices are manufactured, inspected, and released to approved specifications.Since there was no evidence to suggest the event was related to a manufacturing or design issue, no internal action activity is required.It should be noted that product failure could be caused by multiple factors.The instructions for use (ifu) do contain the following recommendations: ¿ if resistance is met during manipulation, determine the cause of resistance before proceeding.¿ do not apply undue force if resistance is encountered at any point during stent manipulation.Withdraw the unit and advance a new one.As part of the post market surveillance program, information from this complaint is trended to identify statistical signals for consideration of further correction action.Since there was no evidence to suggest the event was related to a manufacturing or design issue, no corrective actions will be taken at this time.A supplemental report will be submitted if new facts arise which materially alter information submitted in a previous mdr report.

• Brand Name: CERENOVUS ENTERPRISE
• Common Device Name: INTRACRANIAL NEUROVASCULAR STENT
• Manufacturer (Section D): MEDOS INTERNATIONAL SARL; chemin-blanc 38; le locle neuchatel CH-24 00; SZ CH-2400
• Manufacturer (Section G): CERENOVUS INC; 325 paramount dr; raynham MA 02767
• Manufacturer Contact: henry boden ; 31 technology dr; irvine, CA 92618 ; 9497882078
• MDR Report Key: 23291111
• Report Number: 3008114965-2025-01087
• Device Sequence Number: 4863892
• Product Code: NJE
• UDI-Device Identifier: 10886704075356
• UDI-Public: (01)10886704075356(17)271128(10)9493891
• Combination Product (Y/N): N
• Initial Reporter Country: CH
• PMA/510(K) Number: H60001
• Number of Events Summarized: 1
• Summary Report (Y/N): N
• Serviced by Third Party (Y/N): Unknown
• Reporter Type: Manufacturer
• Report Source: Foreign,Health Professional,Company Representative
• Initial Reporter Occupation: Other Health Care Professional
• Type of Report: Initial,Followup,Followup,Followup
• Report Date (Section B): 11/03/2025

1 Device was Involved in the Event

1 Patient was Involved in the Event

• Is this an Adverse Event Report?: No
• Is this a Product Problem Report?: Yes
• Operator of Device: Health Professional
• Device Catalogue Number: ENCR402312
• Device Lot Number: 9493891
• Was Device Available for Evaluation?: Device Returned to Manufacturer
• Is the Reporter a Health Professional?: Yes
• Type of Report(Section G): Thirty-Day
• Initial Date Received by Manufacturer: 09/25/2025
• Supplement Date Received by Manufacturer: 10/23/2025; 10/30/2025; 11/03/2025
• Initial Report FDA Received Date: 10/15/2025
• Supplement Report FDA Received Date: 10/27/2025; 10/30/2025; 11/03/2025
• Was Device Evaluated by Manufacturer? (Y/N): Yes
• Date Device Manufactured: 12/18/2024
• Is the Device Labeled for Single Use? (Y/N): Yes
• Is This a Single-Use Device that was Reprocessed and Reused on a Patient? (Y/N): No
• Usage of Device: Initial
• Patient Sequence Number: 1
• Concomitant Medical Products and Therapy/Usage Dates: PROWLER SELECT PLUS 150/5CM
• Patient Sex: Unknown