|
As reported, during angiography of the renal artery, a flexor ansel guiding sheath leaked.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.
|
|
E1: postal = (b)(6).H3: device evaluation anticipated but not yet begun.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 angiography of the renal artery, a flexor ansel guiding sheath leaked.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.Corrected information: d4 (udi).Investigation evaluation: reviews of the complaint history, device history record (dhr), 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 device did not leak during leak testing, and the silicone disc was not damaged.A document-based investigation evaluation was performed.A review of the device history record found that one device from a subassembly lot did not pass quality control inspections; however, the affected product was scrapped prior to release from cook.A review of complaint history found no additional relevant complaints for this lot number.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, and investigation of the returned device suggests that there is evidence the device was manufactured to specification.Although one device from a subassembly lot did not pass quality control inspections, the device was scrapped prior to release from cook, there are 100% inspections in place, adequate inspection activities have been established, there is objective evidence that the dhr was fully executed, and no other lot-related complaints have been received from the field.Therefore, cook has concluded that there is no evidence of devices manufactured out of specification in-house or in the field.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.Although the device did not leak upon return to cook, the exact conditions experienced by the customer cannot be duplicated.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.
|