| Model Number |
G56232 |
| Medical Device Problem Code |
Material Separation (1562)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Code |
No Known Impact Or Consequence To Patient (2692)
|
| Date of Event |
04/26/2018
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Malfunction
|
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
(b)(4).Pma/510(k) number: pre-amendment.This report includes information known at this time.A follow-up report will be submitted should additional relevant information become available.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
It was reported that at the end of a lower extremity angiogram procedure, the check-flo hub broke off the flexor high-flex ansel guiding sheath.The complaint device was introduced through the right common femoral artery in the ipselateral approach and was curved and taped down to the drape.Another manufacturer's 7mm x 250mm stent was used through the flexor high-flex ansel guiding sheath.After removal, another flexor high-flex ansel guiding sheath was used to successfully complete the procedure.According to the initial reporter, a section of the device did not remain in the patients anatomy.No adverse effects were reported as a result of this occurrence.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
No additional information regarding the patient and/or event has been received since the previous medwatch report was sent.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
Investigation ¿ evaluation: a review of the dimensional verification, complaint history, device history record, drawing, manufacturing instructions, quality control, and a visual inspection of the returned device were conducted during the investigation.The visual inspection of the returned device confirmed that the sheath tubing was separated from the hub.A 2mm compression was also present in the sheath tubing, beginning at a distance of 8 mm from the proximal end.The inner diameter of the connecting cap was determined to be within specification, while the sheath flare did not pass examination with the flare gauge as it would not pass through either the large lumen or the small lumen.Additionally, a document based investigation evaluation was performed.There is no evidence to suggest the product was not made to specifications.A review of the device history record showed no nonconforming events which could contribute to this failure mode.It should be noted there were no other reported complaints for this lot number.Based on the information provided, the examination of the returned product, and the results of our investigation, a definitive root cause could not be determined.Measures are being conducted to address this failure mode.We will continue to monitor for similar complaints.Per the quality engineering risk assessment, no further action is required.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
No additional information regarding the patient and/or event has been received since the previous medwatch report was sent.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
This mdr is being submitted as having information not previously reported.Additional complaint investigation and record remediation was not performed.This report is required by the fda under 21 cfr part 803.This report is based on unconfirmed information submitted by others.Neither the submission of this report nor any statement made in it is intended to be an admission that any cook device is defective or malfunctioned; that a death or serious injury occurred; or that any cook device caused or contributed to; or is likely to cause or contribute to a death or serious injury if a malfunction occurred.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|