|
Results: the embolization coil was detached from its pusher assembly.The outer diameter (od) of the embolization coil and the proximal constraint sphere were measured and found to be within specification.The coil windings were offset.Conclusions: evaluation of the returned device revealed that the pc400 embolization coil and proximal constraint sphere od was within specification.The non-penumbra microcatheter mentioned in the complaint and the pc400 pusher assembly were not returned for evaluation.Therefore, the root cause of the resistance experienced by the physician, and the unintentional detachment of the embolization coil could not be determined.The offset coil windings likely occurred due to forceful advancement against resistance.Penumbra coils are visually inspected during in-process inspection and during quality inspection after manufacturing.The manufacturing records for this lot were reviewed and did not reveal any outstanding discrepancies, design, or quality concerns.
|
|
The patient was undergoing a coil embolization procedure to treat a renal arteriovenous fistula (avf) using penumbra coil 400's (pc400's).During the procedure, while attempting to deploy the first pc400, the physician deployed about fifteen centimeters of the coil into the target vessel and then encountered rapid blood flow from the shunt, which pushed the coil aside.The physician then decided to retract the pc400 in order to reposition the balloon catheter.While manipulating the pc400 so that it could be retracted back into the non-penumbra microcatheter, the physician encountered resistance and subsequently, the pc400 unintentionally detached within the microcatheter.Therefore, the physician removed the microcatheter containing the detached pc400 from the patient and then flushed the coil out of the microcatheter with saline.Thereafter, the procedure was completed using the same non-penumbra microcatheter and a new pc400.There was no report of an adverse effect to the patient.
|