• Decrease font size
  • Return font size to normal
  • Increase font size
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services

MAUDE Adverse Event Report: BTG YOKNEAM Icerod Needle; Unit, Cryosurgical, Accessories

  • Print
  • Share
  • E-mail
-
Super Search Devices@FDA
510(k) | DeNovo | Registration & Listing | Adverse Events | Recalls | PMA | HDE | Classification | Standards
CFR Title 21 | Radiation-Emitting Products | X-Ray Assembler | Medsun Reports | CLIA | TPLC
 

BTG YOKNEAM Icerod Needle; Unit, Cryosurgical, Accessories Back to Search Results
Model Number FPRPR3203
Medical Device Problem Code Adverse Event Without Identified Device or Use Problem (2993)
Health Effect - Clinical Codes Fever (1858); Hemoptysis (1887); Hemothorax (1896); Pain (1994); Pleural Effusion (2010); Pneumothorax (2012); Unspecified Gastrointestinal Problem (4491)
Date of Event 11/17/2025
Type of Reportable Event Serious Injury
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
B3: date of event- publish date selected.Detailed product information was not provided to bsc.Because the product lot number is unknown, we are unable to provide the complete unique identifier (udi) #.Yao, p., ye, x., wang, m., liu, c., tao, x., hu, h., & wu, x.(2025).Safety and efficacy of microwave ablation versus argon-helium cryoablation for the treatment of primary high-risk pulmonary nodules: a propensity score-matched study.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery, 15(12), 12765-12776.Https://doi.Org/10.21037/qims-2025-1673.
 
Event or Problem Description
It was reported that adverse events occurred, and catheterization was required.This retrospective analysis aimed to compare the safety and efficacy of microwave ablation (mwa) versus cryoablation (ca) in patients with primary high-risk pulmonary nodules.All lung mwa and ca procedures were performed by two experienced (>5 years) interventional radiologists under computed tomography (ct) guidance.General anesthesia was administered through a combination of intravenous and inhalational agents.Continuous monitoring of cardiac activity and vital parameters was maintained throughout each procedure.Upon completion, a follow-up ct scan was performed to detect any immediate complications, and patients were subsequently transferred to an inpatient unit for observation.Cryoablation was performed using visual ice? system with icerod1.5 cryoprobes under ct guidance to ensure the targeted nodule was encompassed by an adequate margin.The ablation protocol consisted of three freeze-thaw cycles.The protocol included a first freeze of 3 minutes, a thaw period of 3 minutes, a second freeze lasting 8 minutes, followed by a 5-minute thaw, and a final 8-minute freeze before active thawing.The ablation zone was assessed with non-contrast ct imaging at 3-5-minute intervals during the procedure to confirm ice coverage with at least a 5 mm circumferential margin beyond the tumor.After ablation, patients underwent outpatient follow-up with ct imaging scheduled at 1, 3, and 6 months, and then at six-month intervals thereafter.The primary endpoints assessed in this study included technical success, clinical efficacy, safety profile, disease-free survival (dfs), and overall survival (os).A total of 31 patients with 35 primary high-risk pulmonary nodules treated by ca were included in the analysis.The complication rates were comparable between the two groups: ca, 25/31 versus mwa, 68/108.The most common complications were pneumothorax (50.36%) and pleural effusion (30.22%).No ablation-related deaths occurred.Mild pneumothorax was observed in 14 of the patients and moderate to severe pneumothorax occurred in 3 patients from the ca group.Mild pleural effusion was observed in 10 patients from the ca group.Hemothorax was also noted in 1 patient, subcutaneous emphysema in 3 patients, hemoptysis in 3 patients, catheterization in 4 patients and fever within 48 hours postoperatively in 3 patients from the ca group.The pain scores of the ca group were significantly lower than those of the mwa group.The median hospital stay was 5 days in the ca group.
 
Search Alerts/Recalls

  New Search  |  Submit an Adverse Event Report

Brand Name
Icerod Needle
Common Device Name
Unit, Cryosurgical, Accessories
Manufacturer (Section D)
BTG YOKNEAM
tavor building 1
po box 224
yokneam 20692 03
IS  2069203
Manufacturer (Section G)
Galil Medical Ltd.
tavor bldg. 1
industrial park
yokneam 20692 03
IS   2069203
Manufacturer Contact
ricardo amaro castro
4100 hamline ave n
arden hills, MN 55112
+1(952)930-6396
MDR Report Key25894295
Report Number2124215-2026-39269
Device Sequence Number13253693
Product Code GEH
UDI-Device Identifier07290104830198
UDI-Public(01)07290104830198
Combination Product (Y/N)N
Initial Reporter CountryCH
PMA/510(K) Number
K051052
Number of Events Summarized1
Summary Report (Y/N)N
Reporter Type Manufacturer
Report Source Other,Foreign,Literature,Health Professional,Company Representative
Initial Reporter Occupation Non-Healthcare Professional
Type of Report Initial,Followup
Report Date (Section B) 08/24/2026
1 Device was Involved in the Event
1 Patient was Involved in the Event
Is this an Adverse Event Report? Yes
Is this a Product Problem Report? No
Operator of Device Health Professional
Device Model NumberFPRPR3203
Device Catalogue NumberFPRPR3203
Was Device Available for Evaluation? No
Is the Reporter a Health Professional? No
Was the Report Sent to FDA? No
Type of Report(Section G)Thirty-Day
Initial Date Received by Manufacturer 06/23/2026
Supplement Date Received by ManufacturerNot provided
Initial Report FDA Received Date07/21/2026
Supplement Report FDA Received Date08/24/2026
Is the Device Labeled for Single Use? (Y/N) Yes
Is This a Single-Use Device that was
Reprocessed and Reused on a Patient? (Y/N)
No
Usage of Device Initial
Patient Sequence Number1
Outcome Attributed to Adverse Event Other; Required Intervention;
Patient SexUnknown
-
-