|
(b)(4).The serial number on the returned sample is (b)(6).Returned for investigation was a 30cc 7.5fr ultraflex intra-aortic balloon catheter (iabc) with the original packaging box that matches the serial number for the returned sample.The sample was returned in a cardboard box and was loosely packed within the original packaging carton.Upon return, the stylet was noted inserted within the iabc central lumen.The peel away sheath was noted on the iabc.The one-way valve was tethered to the short driveline tubing.The bladder was fully unwrapped.The outer lumen was noted damaged, consistent with being buckled at approximately 32cm to 37cm from the distal tip.No blood was noted on the exterior surfaces of the returned sample.No obvious blood was noted within the helium pathway.The customer photos were reviewed.The photos show the iabc; in the photo, the retention sleeves were noted on the bladder membrane.The photo shows the original packaging label.The one-way valve was tested and passed.A vacuum was pulled on the one-way valve, and it held for at least 1 minute according to quality system document.The stylet was removed from the iabc central lumen without any difficulty.The catheter's central lumen was aspirated and flushed using a 60cc lab inventory syringe.No blood or debris was noted.The iabc was leak tested in accordance with testing methods from manufacturing procedure.Multiple leaks were immediately detected from the iabc outer lumen at the locations of the previously noted damaged outer lumen.It could not be confidently determined how the damage occurred to the iab outer lumen.A lab inventory 0.025in guidewire was back loaded through iabc distal tip.No resistance was noted; the guidewire was able to advance through the central lumen.No blood or debris was noted.A device history record (dhr) review was conducted for the lot number with no relevant findings.The device passed all manufacturing specifications prior to release.The reported complaint that the "balloon would not inflate completely" is confirmed.During the investigation, the outer lumen was noted damaged, and leaks were noted resulting from the damaged outer lumen, which caused the reported complaint.Based on a review of the device history record (dhr), the product met specification upon release; however, the specifications were not met during the complaint investigation due to the damaged outer lumen.The root cause of the outer lumen leak is undetermined; a potential root cause is customer handling.No further action is required at this time.This will be monitored for any developing trends.
|