|
It was reported that during a ureteroscopy procedure, the wire of an 'ncircle tipless stone extractor' detached.As reported, the surgeon attempted to retrieve a stone measuring approximately 5¿7 mm from the mid-to-lower ureter using the device; however, the stone was determined to be too large.The user then attempted to fragment the stone with a laser, and during this process, the laser contacted one of the basket wires.As a result, the wire detached from one end while the opposite end remained attached to the main body of the device.It was reported that upon removal of the device 'later on', it was noted that the other end of the wire had also separated from the device and could not be located.Another extractor was subsequently used to retrieve all remaining stone fragments.The patient will undergo a computed tomography (ct) scan to assess if a portion of the wire remain inside the body; results are unknown.
|
|
Blank fields on this form indicate the information is unknown, unavailable, or unchanged.Correction: d2a - common device name.Investigation ¿ evaluation.It was reported that during a ureteroscopy procedure, the wire of an 'ncircle tipless stone extractor' detached.As reported, the surgeon attempted to retrieve a stone measuring approximately 5¿7 mm from the mid-to-lower ureter using the device; however, the stone was determined to be too large.The user then attempted to fragment the stone with a laser, and during this process, the laser contacted one of the basket wires.As a result, the wire detached from one end while the opposite end remained attached to the main body of the device.It was reported that upon removal of the device 'later on', it was noted that the other end of the wire had also separated from the device and could not be located.Another extractor was subsequently used to retrieve all remaining stone fragments.The patient will undergo a computed tomography (ct) scan to assess if a portion of the wire remain inside the body; results are unknown.Reviews of the complaint history, device history record (dhr), instructions for use (ifu), manufacturer¿s instructions (mi), and quality control (qc) procedures were conducted during the investigation.Functional tests and visual inspection of the returned complaint device was also conducted.One ncircle tipless stone extractor was returned for investigation in an open package with label.A laser fiber from another manufacturer was also returned.The handle will actuate the basket.One basket wire loop remains with a break in the wire, charring is evident.The other basket wire loop is missing.Additionally, a document-based investigation evaluation was performed.A review of the device master record (dmr) concluded that sufficient inspection activities are in place to identify this failure mode prior to distribution.A review of the device history record and complaint history found no discrepancies or additional complaints on the final or sub-assembly lots.Based on the available information, cook has concluded that the device was manufactured to specification and that there is no evidence suggesting nonconforming product exists either in house or in the field.Cook also reviewed product labeling; the ifu supplied with the device states the following in consideration of the reported failure mode: precautions: the device is conductive.Avoid contact with any electrified instrument do not use excessive force to manipulate the device.Damage to the device may occur.Based upon the available information, inspection of the returned device, and results of the investigation, cook has concluded that the cause of the complaint is possibly use error however it is not possible to rule out other procedural factors, it was reported that the stone was initially attempted to be removed with the stone extractor and then determined to be too large.The appropriate personnel have been notified.Cook will continue to monitor for similar complaints.Per the risk assessment, no further action is required.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.
|