|
|
| Catalog Number |
400SMTSFT3H06 |
| Medical Device Problem Codes |
Fracture (1260); Difficult or Delayed Activation (2577)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Code |
No Consequences Or Impact To Patient (2199)
|
| Date of Event |
08/07/2017
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Malfunction
|
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
The product was not returned for evaluation.Without the return of the device, the root cause of the problem cannot be determined.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: 3005168196-2017-01538, 3005168196-2017-01539, 3005168196-2017-01540, 3005168196-2017-01541, 3005168196-2017-01542, 3005168196-2017-01543.The device was implanted in the patient.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
The patient was undergoing a coil embolization procedure in the right internal carotid artery-posterior communicating artery (ic-pc) using penumbra smart coils and penumbra smart coil detachment handles (handle).During the procedure, the physician advanced a non-penumbra microcatheter through a non-penumbra guide catheter, towards the right ic-pc and then deployed and detached three smart coils into the target vessel using a handle.After the fourth smart coil (lot # f73015) was deployed, it was noted that a segment of the coil's distal detachment tip (ddt) was fractured and might have been left inside the aneurysm.The physician then deployed a fifth smart coil (lot #f70649) into the target vessel but was unable to detach it using the same handle.A new handle was then opened and used to detach the fifth smart coil.While attempting to advance the sixth smart coil (lot # unknown) through the microcatheter, the physician experienced resistance and thought that the smart coil had unintentionally detached inside the microcatheter.Therefore, the physician advanced a non-penumbra guidewire into the microcatheter and used it to push the smart coil into the aneurysm.After that, the physician deployed and detached the seventh and eight smart coils without any issues.After deploying the ninth smart coil (lot # f70768) into the target vessel, the physician was unable to detach the coil using the handle.The physician then made additional attempts to detach the coil using the same handle and was successful.It was reported that the delivery tip of this ninth coil was fractured.While attempting to insert the tenth smart coil (lot # unknown) into and through the microcatheter, the physician experienced resistance and decided to remove the microcatheter containing the smart coil.Thereafter, the procedure was completed using another non-penumbra microcatheter, additional smart coils and non-penumbra coils.After the procedure, the physician attempted to remove the tenth smart coil from the microcatheter; however, the smart coil pusher assembly distal detachment tip (ddt) became fractured.There was no report of an adverse effect to the patient.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
(b)(4).This report is associated with mfr report numbers: 3005168196-2017-01538, 3005168196-2017-01539, 3005168196-2017-01540, 3005168196-2017-01541, 3005168196-2017-01542, 3005168196-2017-01543.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
The patient was undergoing a coil embolization procedure in the right internal carotid artery-posterior communicating artery (ic-pc) using penumbra smart coils and penumbra smart coil detachment handles (handle).During the procedure, the physician advanced a non-penumbra microcatheter through a non-penumbra guide catheter, towards the right ic-pc and then deployed and detached three smart coils into the target vessel using a handle.The physician then had difficulty detaching the fourth smart coil (lot # f73015) using the handle.After several attempts, the coil successfully detached.While attempting to advance the fifth smart coil (lot #f70649), the physician experienced resistance and noticed that the fourth coil''s distal detachment tip (ddt) was fractured inside the microcatheter.Therefore, the physician used a guidewire to push the ddt into the aneurysm.The physician re-advanced the fifth smart coil through the microcatheter and attempted to detach the coil using the handle; however, the coil failed to detach.Therefore, the physician opened a new handle and the coil was detached without issue.While attempting to advance the ninth smart coil (lot # f70768) through the microcatheter, the physician experienced resistance and decided to remove the smart coil and the microcatheter.Upon removal of the devices, the physician noticed that the coil¿s delivery tip was fractured within the microcatheter.Therefore the procedure was completed using another microcatheter and additional coils.There was no report of an adverse effect to the patient.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|
|
|