|
Results: the ruby coil pusher assembly was damaged in multiple locations along its length.Conclusions: evaluation of the returned pusher assemblies revealed excessive kink damage along the length of each pusher.These damages were likely incidental and likely occurred during packaging for return.Due to the return packaging-related damage to each of the devices, the root cause of the reported failure could not be determined.However, if an rhv is not used, the introducer sheath may not remain properly aligned within the microcatheter hub.If an embolization coil is advanced while the introducer sheath is not properly aligned, offset coils winds may result.These offset coil winds may contribute to any resistance experienced or the inability to advance the coil into the microcatheter.The lantern mentioned in the complaint and the ruby coil embolization coils were not returned for evaluation.Penumbra coils 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 numbers: 3005168196-2017-01149, 3005168196-2017-01150.
|
|
The patient was undergoing a coil embolization procedure using pod8's and ruby coils.During the procedure, while attempting to advance a pod8 and two ruby coils out of their introducer sheaths and into the lantern delivery microcatheter (lantern), the technologist encountered resistance and was unable to advance the coils out of their introducer sheaths.Therefore, the pod8 and ruby coils were removed and the procedure was completed using new ruby coils and the same lantern.There was no report of an adverse effect to the patient.
|