|
Due to the automated manufacturing execution system (mes) system there are controls in the manufacturing process to ensure the product met specifications upon release during analysis, the subject microcatheter was returned with a stent.The shaft of the subject microcatheter was kinked/bent and broken/fractured under the primary strain relief.The distal tip of the stent delivery wire was located within the lumen of the hub section (subject microcatheter).The reported complaint was confirmed based on analysis the device failed to meet specifications when received for complaint investigation based on the analyzed anomalies noted to the device.The reported event is covered in the device directions 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.Additional information provided by the customer indicated that there was no damage noted to the packaging prior to opening the packaging, the subject device was confirmed to be in good condition during preparation/prior to use on the patient, the subject device was prepared for use as per the directions for use, continuous flush was set up and maintained throughout the clinical procedure.The patients anatomy was severely tortuous.It was reported that an attempt was made to advance a stent through the subject microcatheter; however, difficulty was encountered when introducing the stent into the subject microcatheter, and after multiple attempts, the attempt failed due to the subject microcatheter occlusion.During the removal process, the hub connection of the subject microcatheter broke, resulting in separation of the hub from the microcatheter shaft.During analysis, the subject microcatheter was returned with a stent.The shaft of the subject microcatheter was kinked/bent and was broken/fractured under the primary strain relief.The distal tip of the stent delivery wire was located within the lumen of the hub section (subject microcatheter).Based on a review of all available information and the analysis of the returned subject microcatheter device it is probable that manipulation of the subject device due resistance would have caused the damage noted during analysis.The complaint was reported for hub broken/fracture; however, the location of the fracture on the subject catheter shaft would have been perceived as hub fracture.An assignable cause of procedural factors will be assigned to the as reported 'catheter hub friction', 'catheter hub broken/fractured' and the as reported/as analyzed ' catheter hub blocked/occluded' as well as the as analyzed 'catheter shaft broken/fractured during use' and 'catheter shaft kinked/bent' as the issue is 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.This is 2 of 2 mdr reports.
|