It was reported by the physician during a peripheral therapeutic procedure the device became lodged in infra-popliteal space due to suspected acute vessel spasm by the physician.Despite administration of nitroglycerin to relax vessel and removing the drive unit to release the device, the operator was unable to extract the device.Upon further application of force, the device stretched and separated approximately 10cm proximal to the distal tip.This 10cm section remained inside the body.The residual piece was unable to be removed after nitrogylcerin administration and attempting to remove intravascularly with a 4fr en-snare.The patient procedure was converted to an open surgical procedure and the device was removed surgically with a distal sfa to distal popliteal bypass graft.By report, the patient expired post-procedure.
|
(b)(4).This case has been investigated in accordance with the manufacturers policy.This supplemental report is being submitted because the device has been analyzed, additional information has been received and for correction of previously reported data.Correction: there is no serial number for this device.Lot number reported was for the kit and not the catheter.The facility reported the event under maude adverse event report (b)(4).Updated to reflect the device has been evaluated by the manufacturer.The device was returned and evaluated in accordance with manufacturers policy.Visual inspection was completed prior to the decontamination process and subsequently returned to the hospital for pathology.Minimal handling of the product was completed as there was no decontamination process performed.Only non-destructive analysis was performed.During visual inspection it was confirmed there was a separation of the catheter.The site of separation was approximately 2 inches from the distal end (cutter end).Stretching and twisting of the shaft was evident at the sites distal and proximal to separation location, indicative of a pull or tensile and torsional stress overload condition resulting in the catheter break.The catheter torque shaft was also subjected to a tensile load which caused it to fail in a similar fashion.Additionally, the condition of the remaining vessel material about the catheter appeared twisted, and tightly encased the catheter shaft.Per the instructions for use (ifu) per table 1, catheter key specifications, on page 2 indicates for the model / length of this catheter, that the minimum vessel diameter be 3.0 mm.Warnings on page 2 indicate: · do not operate the atherectomy system in vessels smaller than the indicated size as perforation, dissection or injury may occur.· when the atherectomy catheter is exposed to the vascular system, it should not be advanced or retracted except under direct fluoroscopic observation.If resistance is met during advancement or retraction, determine the cause of the resistance before continuing.In this case, resistance was encountered, and pulling against resistance may result in catheter fracture or patient injury.The twisted state of the tissue suggests that the entire unit was rotated during the attempted extraction which may have resulted in the vessel dissection or damage.An independent third party failure analysis company evaluated the fractured surfaces.Scanning electron microscope (sem) analysis concluded that there were no defects found in the analyzed fractured surfaces and that the catheter had ruptured due to tensile overload.The manufacturing documentation for this device was reviewed and the device met all quality and manufacturing release criteria.There were no nonconforming material reports or deviations noted that would contribute to the reported failure mode.To date, no other complaints were reported for this same failure mode within this lot.Evaluation codes: updated per investigation findings.Per facility report, the patient developed pneumonia and became septic.
|