(b)(4).Attempt was made to gather thorough event information during complaint processing; the physician commented that it could possibly be an allergic reaction to coating agents; however, there was no evidence to support that.Device analysis could not be conducted as the guide wire was not returned.Lot history review revealed no anomaly relating to the reported event.No other similar product experience report including peeling of the coating was received.It was confirmed that manufacturing records showed no anomaly and no other complaints were received for the lot; therefore, it was concluded that there was no indication of product deficiency.However, a possibility could not be completely ruled out that the subject device might cause or contribute to the reported patient harm.Instructions for use (ifu) states "allergic reaction" as one of possible adverse effects.
|