| Catalog Number |
RBY4C0315 |
| Medical Device Problem Codes |
Detachment Of Device Component (1104); Failure to Advance (2524)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Code |
No Consequences Or Impact To Patient (2199)
|
| Date of Event |
02/21/2018
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Malfunction
|
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
Please note the lot numbers for the two complaint coils are f80129 and f80744, however it is unknown which coil had which failure type, therefore both lots were reviewed.The products were not returned for evaluation.Without the return of the devices, the root cause of the problem cannot be determined.The manufacturing records for these lots were reviewed and did not reveal any outstanding discrepancies, design, or quality concerns.This report is associated with mfr report numbers: 3005168196-2018-00582.The hospital disposed of the device.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
The patient was undergoing a coil embolization procedure treating a gastrointestinal bleed using ruby coils.During the procedure, the physician advanced and retracted a ruby coil back into its introducer sheath.When attempting to advance the ruby coil later in the procedure, the physician was unable to advance it out of its introducer sheath.Another ruby coil was also retracted back into its introducer sheath, however the ruby coil unintentionally detached upon retraction into the introducer sheath.The procedure was completed using additional ruby coils.There was no report of an adverse effect to the patient.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
The patient was undergoing a coil embolization procedure in the gastrointestinal artery using ruby coils.During the procedure, the physician retracted a ruby coil into its introducer sheath after advancing it within the non-penumbra microcatheter because the ruby coil was the wrong size.When attempting to advance the same ruby coil later in the procedure, the physician was unable to advance it out of its introducer sheath.Another ruby coil was also retracted because the physician believed it was the wrong size, however the ruby coil unintentionally detached upon retraction into the introducer sheath.The procedure was completed using additional ruby coils.There was no report of an adverse effect to the patient.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|