| Model Number |
54-64501 |
| Medical Device Problem Code |
Material Separation (1562)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Code |
No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions (4582)
|
| Date of Event |
12/04/2025
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Malfunction
|
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
E3: occupation: tech the actual device has been returned for evaluation.The investigation is currently ongoing.A follow-up report will be submitted once the investigation is complete.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
Terumo medical corporation received the following reported information: when the physician tried to remove the sheath, it ripped.Then they cut the sidearm part off and tried to slide a smaller dilator down to the tip of the sheath to get it out.It did not work, and the patient had to go to the hospital to have the sheath removed.Additional information was received on 09dec2025: the procedure for the patient at the time the reported issue occurred was a left angio.It appeared that there may have been calcification/tortuous anatomy at the time the destination device ripped at the tip as described when trying to remove the tip of the sheath.The patient did not experience spasm at the time the sheath ripped.The patient was transported to the hospital and had a vascular cut down.Patient condition was stable.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
This report is being sent as follow-up no.1 to update section h3, and to provide the completed investigation results.One 6fr destination kit was returned to terumo medical corporation for product evaluation.The returned sample included the sheath.Visual analysis was performed on the returned sample.The sheath was cut and only 3.7cm was returned.The cut appeared to be clean and done after the alleged breakage.The sheath shaft was observed to be deformed.One 6fr destination kit was returned to terumo medical corporation for product evaluation.The returned sample was observed to be deformed and cut.The complaint can be confirmed for sheath mechanical separation.The exact root cause cannot be determined.The likely cause is there was resistance from the calcium/plaque during withdrawal.Review of the device history record (dhr) showed there were no issues noted during the manufacture of the product that could have contributed to this complaint condition.Currently no action is recommended since this risk evaluation is within the predetermined limits in the hazard based risk table (hbrt).
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|