| Model Number |
45-751324 |
| Medical Device Problem Code |
Premature Separation (4045)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Code |
No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions (4582)
|
| Date of Event |
11/20/2025
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Serious Injury
|
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
As reported: left internal iliac embolization using a 6fr rdc destination sheath and a 4fr c2 glidecath.This was the final coil of the case, where we were trying to put one more coil in the inflow of the aneurysm.We lost catheter position, and when we went to retract the coil before repositioning the coil stretched and detached.We tried to put negative pressure on the catheter and pull it out without success.The only path forward was to snare the coil and pull it out, which was done successfully.No patient injury was reported and the case was completed in regular fashion.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
The device was stated to be available for return to the manufacturer for evaluation, but has not yet been returned despite attempts made.Additional due diligence attempts are ongoing.The alleged product issue/event as described could not be confirmed.If the device is received at a later date, an investigation will be performed and a supplemental mdr will be submitted.A search for non-conformance's associated with this part/lot number combination did not reveal any production-related issues relevant to the complaint that occurred during manufacturing of the device.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
No new information received.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
The investigation of the returned coil system found the implant coil stretched at the proximal section and separated from the pusher.The pusher was not returned for evaluation.The investigation found that the implant's monofilament at the tie knot showed a tensile break shape at the tip, which is consistent with the device experiencing force that exceeded the strength of the monofilament causing the implant to separate from the pusher.The physical evaluation of the device could not identify the conditions or circumstances that led to the stretched implant, but this condition is consistent with the device experiencing forces exceeding the implant's yield strength.The catheter used in the procedure was not returned, so the investigation could not determine if it had caused or contributed to the reported complaint.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|