|
The device was not returned for analysis.Production record and corrective and preventative actions (capa) reviews were performed and revealed no indication of a product quality issue.Additionally, a review of the complaint history identified no other similar complaints from this lot.Based on the information provided, a definitive cause for the reported complaints could not be determined.Possible factors that may contribute to difficulty removing the protective sheath may include, but not limited to, manufacturing, normal variation within the manufacturing process or protective sheath removal technique.Possible factors that may contribute to difficulty inflating and deflating the balloon include, but are not limited to, manufacturing, deflation technique, tortuous anatomy, loose connection with the indeflator, contamination in the inflation lumen or damage to the guide wire and/or inflation lumen.A conclusive cause for the reported complaint could not be determined since the device or component were not returned for analysis.There is no indication of a product quality issue with respect to the design, manufacture, or labeling of the device.D9 correction: device available for evaluation: updated from yes to no.
|
|
It was reported that the procedure was to treat a de novo circumflex artery lesion.During preparation of the 2.50x12 mm trek rx balloon dilatation catheter (bdc), difficulty was noted when removing the protective sheath.The bdc was prepped and advanced for pre-dilation.The balloon was inflated once at 8 atm; however, the balloon did not properly inflate.Negative pressure was applied for 3 to 5 seconds; however, the balloon was slow to deflate.Eventually, the balloon was successfully deflated and removed.An additional trek bdc was used to complete the procedure.There were no adverse patient effects and there was no clinically significant delay in the procedure.No additional information was provided.
|