(b)(4).During processing of this complaint, attempts were made to obtain complete event, patient and device information.(b)(4).Visual and dimensional inspections were performed on the returned device.The reported separation was confirmed.The reported failure to advance could not be replicated in a testing environment as it was based on operational circumstances.It should be noted that the coronary dilatation catheters mini trek rx, instructions for use, states: if resistance is felt, determine the cause before proceeding.Continuing to advance or retract the catheter while under resistance may result in damage to the vessels and/or damage/separation of the catheter.In this case, it is likely that the use of force during advancement of the catheter resulted in the shaft kinking and ultimately separating.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 other incidents from this lot.The investigation determined the reported proximal shaft separation appears to be related to user error; however, the failure to advance the catheter appears to be related to circumstances of the procedure.There is no indication of a product quality issue with respects to the design, manufacture, or labeling of the device.
|
It was reported that the procedure was to treat a heavily calcified lesion in the right coronary artery.A 2.0x15mm mini trek balloon dilatation catheter (bdc) was being advanced; however, resistance with the anatomy was felt.Force to try and advance the bdc was applied, but the shaft separated.The bdc and guiding catheter were removed as a unit without issues.The procedure was successfully completed with the deployment of an unknown stent.There were no adverse patient effects and no clinically significant delay in the procedure.No additional information was provided.
|