| Model Number |
181859CS-V-A1-CN |
| Medical Device Problem Codes |
Detachment Of Device Component (1104); Difficult to Remove (1528); Device-Device Incompatibility (2919)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Code |
No Known Impact Or Consequence To Patient (2692)
|
| Date of Event |
09/14/2017
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Serious Injury
|
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
The lot number was provided.A review of the approved device history records indicated the lot met all release criteria.The device has been returned for evaluation.The investigation is currently underway.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
It was reported that after half of the embolization coil had been placed in the aneurysm, the delivery pusher could no longer advance.During the attempt to retract the coil, the coil unexpectedly detached, leaving the distal end of the coil in the aneurysm and the proximal portion of the coil in the vessel.A guidewire was used to capture the coil and remove it from the patient.There was no reported patient injury.The patient is reported to be fine.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
The pusher and introducer were returned for analysis, with a very long implant fully detached from the pusher.The detached implant had evidence of the marker band and distal ball.The implant coil appeared kinked at the proximal end.The distal section of the body coil near the heater section, was stretched to check the presence of any broken implant monofilament/attachment tether.Although the attachment section had sufficient adhesive to retain the monofilament tie knot in place, the attachment tether appears to have come undone from that section.The rest of the pusher was advanced through the introducer, without experiencing any friction.No other damages were noteed on the pusher or the introducer tubing.Based upon the investigation findings and available information, the complaint could not be confirmed; there was no evidence that the coil broke into separate pieces.The pusher was noted to be separated from the coil; however, the adhesive that held the tie knot was adequate.The root cause could not be determined; however, the device exhibited evidence that it was subjected to forces that exceeded its strength specification, evident by the stretched and separated monofilament.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|