| Model Number |
0684-00-0608 |
| Medical Device Problem Codes |
Difficult to Insert (1316); Positioning Problem (3009)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Code |
No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions (4582)
|
| Date of Event |
03/06/2026
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Malfunction
|
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
It was reported that resistance was encountered during the insertion of the trans ray plus 40cc balloon, which hindered smooth advancement.Out of concern for potential balloon damaged, the device was replaced with another balloon of identical specification.The subsequent balloon was inserted smoothly without resistance.No alarms were activated and no patient injury or harm was reported.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
Due to characterization limit e1 initial reporter: (b)(6).The device was not returned and could not be evaluated.It was discarded by the user.We are unable to confirm the reported event.If new information becomes available, a supplemental report will be submitted.Complaint record id (b)(4).
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
N/a.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
Event site postal code: (b)(6).The correction of e1 initial reporter deems required.This is based on the internal evaluation.Previous initial reporter: (b)(6).Corrected initial reporter: (b)(6).An iabp was used for cardiac support in a man in his 70s following catheterization.During insertion, significant resistance was encountered with a trans ray plus 40 cc balloon, raising concern for potential balloon damage.As a precaution, the balloon was removed and replaced with a new balloon of the same size, which was inserted without difficulty.No alarms occurred, and the patient experienced no adverse effects.No decon or visual inspection performed since product was not returned and could not be evaluated.Therefore, we were unable to confirm or determine a root cause for the reported failure.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.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
Updated fields: b4, g3, g6, h2, h11.Corrected fields: d4 (lot and udi), h6 (medical device problem code, type of investigation, investigation findings and investigation conclusions).
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|