|
The following sections were updated/corrected/added: b4, g3, g6, h2, h6, and h11.Additional type of investigation codes that were unable to be added in h6: analysis of images.Labelling review.The reported complaint for damage to vessel during insertion was confirmed with other empirical evidence via complaint description.The device history record review was completed, and this device passed all manufacturing and sterilization inspections.No nonconformances related to the complaint event were identified.The patient did not have any known anatomical variations and there was no difficulty inserting the delivery system that may have contributed to the iliac vein perforation.Imaging review of patient screening also confirmed no tortuosity observed based on the access route taken during the procedure.Available information suggests user manipulation of the delivery system as a potential contributing factor.However, a definitive root cause is unable to be established.Since no manufacturing non-conformances were found and no labeling, training, or ifu deficiencies were identified, no preventative or corrective actions were required.
|