|
It was reported that during an angioplasty, the advance 14 lp low profile balloon catheter deflated, could not hold pressure, and ruptured at 10 atmosphere (atm).During inspection of the balloon at the end of the procedure, it was noted that the balloon was not pierced but a leak was present at the level of the support catheter.The balloon was able to be inflated up to 8 atm; however, a constant pressure of 10 atm was not able to be applied from thirty (30) seconds to one (1) minute as the balloon was deflating.The patient had stenosis prior to the angioplasty procedure.A section of the device did not remain inside the patient¿s body.The patient did not require any additional procedures due to this occurrence.The patient did not experience any adverse effects due to this occurrence.
|
|
Investigation - evaluation: a review of the complaint history, drawings, device history record, documentation, instructions for use (ifu), specifications, and quality control was conducted during the investigation.The complaint device was not returned; therefore, no physical examination could be performed.However, a document-based investigation was performed.Numerous design verification and validation activities have been performed to ensure that this device meets design requirement, each balloon is 100% inspected and verified prior to release.A review of the device history record of the finished product shows no nonconforming events that would contribute to this failure mode.A review of the sub assembly device history record was reviewed and three non-conformances were noted; however; all non-conforming product was not part of the finished lot.There were no other reported complaints for this lot number.The information from the customer suggests there was a leak in the catheter itself.Based upon the information provided and the characteristics displayed, it is plausible to suggest that this incident was user handling related, storage related, other device compatibility, or human anatomy related.However, as no product was returned, and based on the results of our investigation; a definitive root cause could not be determined.Per the quality engineering risk assessment, no further action is required.Appropriate personnel have been notified and monitoring will continue to be performed for similar complaints.
|