|
It was reported by the customer that during use the trp4046 intra-aortic balloon (iab) catheter was inserted per standard procedure.During icu management, intermittent ¿iab catheter requires inspection (flow restriction)¿ alarms were observed.Balloon repositioning under fluoroscopy provided temporary resolution, but the alarm recurred.There was no patient harm or injury reported.
|
|
Updated field: b4, g3, g6, h2, h3, h6(type of investigation, investigation findings, investigation conclusions), h11 the iab was returned with the membrane completely unfolded and blood observed on the exterior of the catheter and between catheter and sheath.The returned maquet sheath was over the catheter and partially covering the rear portion of the balloon.The returned 10¿ sheath was not a maquet product.The extender tubing was also returned.The inner lumen was found occluded with dried blood.The occlusion was unable to be cleared.An underwater leak test of the balloon, catheter, y-fitting, extracorporeal and extender tubing was performed and no leaks were detected.The iab was placed on the cardiosave pump and the iab fully inflated and deflated.The iab then pumped for two hours which represents one complete autofill cycle.The iab pumped normally and no alarm sounded from the pump.The reported problem cannot be confirmed by the evaluation.The 10¿ non maquet sheath was found partially over the membrane.This may cause complications similar to the reported failure.The ifu recommends using the provided 6¿ sheath in the iab kit.A lot history record review was completed for the reported product.No nonconformances were found that are considered to be related to the event.The failure mode is addressed in the risk file and is operating within its risk profile.The ifu addresses the reported failure.There were no ncmrs identified which could cause or contribute to the reported failure.The investigation does not indicate that the device was inadvertently released as non-conforming or an adulterated product or was a counterfeit.The complaint history review did not identify an adverse trend (increase in number of complaints over past three (3) months).Based on the rational provided above, no escalation to the capa process is required.
|