|
The lot number was provided.A review of the approved device history record indicated the lot met all release criteria.A lot history trending review was performed and there were no similar complaints for this lot number.The coil remains implanted in the patient; however, the pusher wire was returned for evaluation.The v-grip and microcatheter used for the procedure were not returned; therefore, analysis of the v-grip, microcatheter, and functional testing could not be performed.The pusher body coils showed no signs of damage.The pet over the heater coil had no visible signs of thermal cycling.The distal end of the monofilament was necked and a tail at the distal section.The electrical circuit was intact.The solder joints were intact at both the distal and proximal ends.Resistance was measured to be within specifications.Results of the product evaluation confirmed the coil was broken.The attachment tether was broken resulting in the implant unexpectedly detaching.The detachment monofilament had similar characteristics to that observed during tensile break, which is consistent with the monofilament being subjected to a force exceeding its tensile strength.Based on the reported procedure details and the product evaluation, the complaint of the coil break can be confirmed; however, the root cause cannot be determined.
|
|
It was reported that after placement of an embolization coil in an aneurysm located at the lower polar splenic branch, resistance and friction were encountered within the microcatheter.During an attempt to reposition, the coil unexpectedly detached.There was no reported intervention.The coil remains implanted in the aneurysm.There was no reported patient injury.
|