| Model Number |
ICRC07X137 |
| Medical Device Problem Codes |
Break (1069); Material Separation (1562); Material Deformation (2976)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Code |
No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions (4582)
|
| Date of Event |
11/04/2025
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Serious Injury
|
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
The device was not returned for investigation.The manufacturing records were reviewed and demonstrated that the product met the design and manufacturing specifications.Based on the information provided, the exact root cause of the shaft break could not be determined.Limited information available indicated that the patient had tortuous anatomy and retraction of the zoom 7x against resistance which could have contributed to the reported event.The zoom ifu provides the following warning related to retraction against resistance."exercise care when manipulating the device through tortuous anatomy.Do not advance or withdraw the catheters or accessory/adjunctive devices against resistance without careful assessment of the cause under fluoroscopy.If the cause cannot be determined, withdraw all devices as a single unit.Excessive manipulation or torquing the device against resistance may result in damage to the vasculature or the device.".
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
It was reported that the patient presented with an m1 occlusion, severe carotid stenosis and stroke-like symptoms.The carotid artery stenosis and third-party sheath placement restricted the advancement of zoom 88 access catheter.Zoom 7x navigated through significant vessel tortuosity and a 360-degree curvature; the procedure was completed in a single aspiration pass.During retraction of the zoom 7x, resistance was encountered, and the catheter tip was found to be damaged upon removal of the device from the patient.Imaging revealed that the catheter tip remained in the patient's m1 segment.The physician then introduced a zoom 55 catheter through the zoom 88 to engage the detached tip and successfully retrieved the entire segment.The patient achieved successful reperfusion and there was no patient sequela.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
A proximal segment of the zoom 7x was returned for evaluation.The investigation of the returned proximal segment demonstrated damage which suggests an axial force was applied during the procedure, resulting in stretching of shaft materials prior to the device breaking.Additionally, multiple kinks were present on the returned catheter segment.Investigation confirmed that the distal section of catheter had separated from the proximal segment.Therefore, the break happened in the catheter shaft and not the tip as originally reported.The distal segment was not returned for investigation.Based on the review of the returned proximal segment, the exact root cause for the broken shaft could not be confirmed.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|