|
Due to the automated mes (manufacturing execution system) system there are controls in the manufacturing process to ensure the product met specifications upon release.During visual inspection, the catheter was returned with a stryker stent deployed within the lumen at the proximal end - the stent deployed after taken out.The catheter was cut in order to retrieve the stent, however the stent was unable to be removed.There was an unknown material (possibly some sort of tubing like (ptfe) polytetrafluoroethylene) present on the distal end of the stent.During a functional inspection, a 0.023" pin gauge was verified to meet the catheter shaft when inserted into the catheter hub.A 0.0158" patency mandrel was unable to be advanced completely through the microcatheter due to the presence of blood.The reported event is covered in the device direction for use (dfu).As well, the risk of the reported event is documented in the risk documentation and there are current controls to mitigate the risk of the as reported event.The reported defect was confirmed based on analysis of the device.The device failed to meet specifications when received for complaint investigation based on the analyzed anomalies noted to the device.Additional information provided by the customer indicated that the device was prepared for use as per the directions for use, there was no damage noted to the packaging prior to opening the packaging, the device confirmed to be in good condition during preparation/prior to use on the patient and continuous flush was set up and maintained throughout the clinical procedure.It was reported that the stent could not be delivered further after passing a short distance through the subject microcatheter hub, despite several attempts.The physician suspected that the stent tip might be damaged and withdrew it for inspection, finding slight deformation.The physician then switched to another stent for delivery, but this stent also became stuck after advancing a short distance through the subject microcatheter and could not proceed further.Based on a review of all available information and the analysis of the returned device it is probable that the catheter shaft was damaged during manipulation of the device during the procedure when resistance was encountered transferring the first stent.It is probable that the first stent damaged the catheter ptfe inner lining preventing the second stent from being advanced and eventually becoming stuck in the microcatheter shaft.An assignable cause of procedural factors will be assigned to the as reported/as analyzed 'catheter shaft friction' as well as the as analyzed 'catheter shaft blocked/occluded' and 'catheter ptfe inner lining peeling' as these issues are associated with a product that meets stryker design and manufacture specifications and was used in according with the dfu but due to procedural and/or anatomical factors during use, the product performance was limited.
|