| Model Number |
H749394671250 |
| Medical Device Problem Codes |
Nonstandard Device (1420); Material Separation (1562)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Code |
No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions (4582)
|
| Date of Event |
05/14/2026
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Malfunction
|
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
It was reported that burr detachment occurred.A 1.35mm rotapro was selected for use.During procedure, the burr disconnected inside the patient.The procedure was completed with another of the different device.There were no patient complications.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
It was reported that burr detachment occurred.A 1.35mm rotapro was selected for use.During procedure, the burr disconnected inside the patient.The procedure was completed with another of the different device.There were no patient complications.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
With all the available information, boston scientific concludes:
device history record review:
the device history record review confirmed that the device met all material, assembly, and performance specifications prior to distribution.Device technical analysis:
the returned device consisted of the rotapro atherectomy system.Inspection of the device showed that the rotawire was able to be removed with no issue.The distal portion of the handshake connection to the burr catheter, which was within the sheath and retrievable upon device return, was found to be detached at the drive interlock weld component and was slightly bent.Additionally, there were multiple sheath kinks to the device.Labeling review:
based on the information provided, there is no evidence that the device was used in a manner inconsistent with the labelled indications.Risk review:
a review of the rotapro hazard analysis was completed and confirmed that the event of burr detachment of device or device component was defined in the risk documentation.This event type has been accounted for during product risk analysis to support acceptable risk benefit for the product.Investigation conclusion:
it was considered likely that the reported events and the condition of the returned device occurred due to procedural factors which can include device interaction and handling.Based on a thorough review of the reported complaint, the most probable cause for this complaint was considered adverse event related to procedure.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|