Catalog Number 09.804.601S |
Device Problems
Break (1069); Burst Container or Vessel (1074)
|
Patient Problem
Device Embedded In Tissue or Plaque (3165)
|
Event Date 12/04/2015 |
Event Type
Injury
|
Manufacturer Narrative
|
Additional product codes for this report include hrx.(b)(4).Device is an instrument and is not implanted or explanted.(b)(6).Device is not distributed in the united states, but is similar to a device marketed in the us.Subject device has been received; no conclusions could be drawn as the device is entering the complaint system.Device history record review: manufacturing site: (b)(4) - manufacturing date: november 14, 2014 - expiry date: october 1, 2017.No non-conformance reports were generated during production.Review of the device history record showed that there were no issues during the manufacture of the product that would contribute to this complaint condition.Device used for treatment, not diagnosis.If information is obtained that was not available for the initial medwatch, a follow-up medwatch will be filed as appropriate.
|
|
Event Description
|
Device report from synthes europe reports an event in (b)(6) as follows: it was reported that a patient underwent a surgical procedure using a vertebral body stent with balloon on (b)(6) 2015.The balloon began to leak during expansion, which only allowed for the stent to expand three (3) to four (4) millimeters.The balloon burst as the surgeon attempted to pull it back.Parts of the burst balloon remained in the patient's vertebra and could not be removed.The vertebra also filled with cement thereafter.The procedure was completed with the achievement of "good anatomical alignment." a ten (10) minute procedural delay was noted.This report is 2 of 2 for (b)(4).
|
|
Manufacturer Narrative
|
Additional narrative: a manufacturing evaluation was completed: two instruments were returned, one system appears intact, and by the other system the balloon has burst transversally.The review of the manufacturing history of the production lot did not reveal any nonconformity.The complaint instrument was manufactured according to specifications and successfully passed all in-process inspections as well as the final inspection.The physician was unable to fully expand the stent due to a leakage of the delivery balloon.He tried to further expand the stent by introducing the vb balloon and using it for a post-dilatation.During this procedure the balloon burst and fractured when it was attempted to retrieve it.The technical analysis of the complaint instruments has shown that the stent delivery system is leaking when > 5 atm pressure is applied.The leakage site is located within a deep scratch near the tip of the balloon.The vb balloon on the other hand had burst in a transversal manner and the distal part of the balloon remained inside the patient.No clear origin of the fracture could be identified at the fracture edge, but several deep scratches were observed on the balloon surface.Based on the information available it appears that the complaint event occurred most probably due to unfavorable circumstances during the intervention (i.E.Balloon damage due to sharp solid bone fragments).Device was used for treatment, not diagnosis.If information is obtained that was not available for the initial medwatch, a follow-up medwatch will be filed as appropriate.
|
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|