|
Balt usa reference: #(b)(4).The returned device was inspected in our quality laboratory.During our analysis: - we observed the implant coil was not included with the device return; - we observed no sign of detachment cycle being ran; - we observed no visual damage to the detachment zone with the pet jacket, lead wires and solder joints intact; - we observed multiple minor kinks along the hypotube; - we observed the microcatheter was not returned; - we conducted destructive testing of the delivery pusher to reveal the detachment profile of the sr thread; - we observed the distal tip of the sr thread experienced necking - indicating the thread endured an overload in tensile stress.Root cause of the reported issue can likely be attributed to an overload of tensile stress exerted on the implant coil.Upon device return, we observed the delivery pusher was returned with minor kinks along the hypotube.Moreover, we noted the detachment zone showed no visual signs of a detachment cycle being ran and the implant coil was not returned.To further analyze the unit, the body coil was deconstructed to reveal the tip of the sr thread which showed that the thread experienced necking, indicating the thread endured an overload in tensile stress.It is possible if the implant coil were to have become damaged during attempts to reposition the coil system, this could have led to the implant coil encountering excessive friction and ultimately lead to the implant coil becoming detached upon retracting the coil system.Without the return of the implant coil its exact condition is unknown, therefore further analysis of the implant coil could not be performed.Furthermore, if the associated microcatheter were to have become damaged or temporarily ovalized during the procedure, this could have forced excessive friction on the implant coil and led to the reported issue.Without the return of the associated microcatheter, further analysis could not be performed.It is indicated in the lhr that the unit underwent 100% inspection which verifies that the implant was free of damage at the point of final inspection.Review of the lot history records did not reveal any in-process or lot-specific issue that could account for the observation.No additional complaints against lot number f260300013 has been made for the same issue.Comprehensive analysis of this failure mode has remained subject to monitoring for any unacceptable increase in trend.The submission of this report or related information to the fda, and its release by fda, does not reflect a conclusion by the party submitting this report of the fda that the report or related information is an admission that the manufacturer, their employees, or the device caused or contributed to the reportable event.
|