| Catalog Number |
RBY4C0406 |
| Medical Device Problem Code |
Detachment Of Device Component (1104)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Code |
No Consequences Or Impact To Patient (2199)
|
| Date of Event |
04/02/2017
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Malfunction
|
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
Results: the ruby coil was kinked throughout its length and wrapped up.The pet lock was intact on the proximal end of the pusher assembly.The embolization coil was detached from the pusher assembly and the stretch resistant wire (sr wire) was fractured.Conclusions: evaluation of the returned devices revealed that the embolization coil was detached from the pusher assembly and the stretch resistant (sr) wire was fractured.Fracture of the sr wire typically occurs due to forceful manipulation of the ruby coil against resistance and will allow the embolization coil to detach.Further evaluation revealed that the distal tip of the lantern was kinked.This damage may have occurred due to forceful manipulation of the lantern within tortuous anatomy and may have contributed to the unintentional detachment of the ruby coil.Further evaluation revealed that the ruby coil pusher assembly and lantern were kinked throughout their lengths.This damage was likely incidental and likely occurred during packaging for return to penumbra.Penumbra coils and catheters are 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.This report is associated with mfr report number: 3005168196-2017-00695.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
The patient was undergoing a coil embolization procedure to treat a gastrointestinal (gi) bleed using ruby coils.It was noted that the patient had very tortuous anatomy.During the procedure, the physician deployed and detached initial coils into the target vessel using a lantern delivery microcatheter (lantern).While attempting to advance a new ruby coil through the lantern, the physician did not mention any resistance; however, the ruby coil unintentionally detached in the lantern.Therefore, the physician removed the lantern containing the detached coil from the patient.The procedure was then completed using another manufacturer¿s microcatheter and gel foam.There was no alleged deficiency against the lantern.The physician wanted to use a smaller microcatheter to finish the procedure.There was no report of an adverse effect to the patient.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|