|
The healthcare professional reported that prior to the start of an endovascular embolization procedure, the outer device packaging and the device, a 125cm large bore catheter (lbc) 71 (ic71125ug / 31512442), were inspected and found to be in good condition.During the procedure, the 125cm lbc was delivered in place and a microcatheter (unspecified brand) was delivered in the lbc.The microcatheter was impeded in the middle section of the lbc and could not advance further.The physician removed the microcatheter and the lbc from the patient and found the middle section of the lbc to be cracked.The physician replaced the lbc and the microcatheter to complete the procedure.On 30-oct-2025, additional information was received.The information indicated that information related to the target vessel of the procedure could not be obtained.There was continuous flush maintained during the procedure.There was no damage noted on the microcatheter when it was removed.The brand and size of the microcatheter could not be obtained.The replacement was another 125cm large bore catheter (lbc) 71 (ic71125ug) and the replacement microcatheter was another of the same brand as the original microcatheter (brand not obtainable).The information confirmed no negative patient impact and no clinically significant delay in the procedure.
|
|
Manufacturer¿s ref.No: (b)(4).Information regarding patient identifier, date of birth, age, sex, gender, weight, race, and ethnicity were not provided.Section e.1: the initial reporter phone is not available / reported.A review of manufacturing documentation associated with this lot (31512442) presented no issues during the manufacturing or inspection processes related to the reported complaint.There were no internal actions related to device manufacture or inspection.Product analysis cannot be conducted as the product was not returned for analysis.No determination of causes and possible contributing factors could be made.As such, the investigation will be closed.With the limited information available and without the product available for analysis, the reported issue documented in the complaint could not be confirmed.Based on the manufacturing documentation review, there is no indication that the event is related to the device manufacturing process.The exact cause of the event could not be conclusively determined; however, it is possible that circumstances of the procedure and / or device manipulation / interaction may have contributed to the reported failure.As part of the post market surveillance program, information from this complaint is trended for statistical signals and corrective / preventive action may be triggered later.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.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.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 manufacturer will submit a supplemental report if new facts arise which materially alter information submitted in a previous mdr report.Additional information will be submitted within 30 days of receipt.
|