The patient and device codes were coded by the manufacturer.(b)(4).During processing of this complaint, attempts were made to obtain complete event, patient and device information.Evaluation summary: a visual, functional and dimensional inspection was performed on the returned device.The reported difficult to position was confirmed.A review of the lot history record identified no manufacturing nonconformities issued to the reported lot that would have contributed to this event.Additionally, a review of the complaint history identified no similar incidents from this lot.The investigation determined the reported difficult to position appears to be related to circumstances of the procedure.Manipulation to advance/remove the device likely contributed to the noted inner member bunching, ultimately causing the inner member to separate.There is no indication of a product quality issue with respect to the design, manufacture, or labeling of the device.
|