|
Results: the pet lock was intact on the proximal end of the second ruby coil evaluated.The pusher assembly was kinked in multiple locations from the proximal end.The embolization coil was intact with its pusher assembly.The introducer sheath was ovalized approximately 7.0 cm from the distal tip and the sheath had coagulated blood inside.Resistance was encountered while attempting to advance the ruby coil out of its introducer sheath.Conclusions: evaluation of the first returned ruby coil revealed that the pusher assembly was kinked and the coil winds were offset.If the device is forcefully advanced against resistance, damage such as a kink may occur.Further evaluation of the returned device revealed that the embolization coil winds were offset.This damage was likely incidental and may have occurred due to the embolization coil not being protected by its introducer sheath, while packaging the device for return to penumbra.Evaluation of the second returned ruby coil revealed that the introducer sheath was ovalized.If the rotating hemostasis valve (rhv) is overtightened on the introducer sheath prior to advancing the coil into a microcatheter, resistance may be encountered and damage such as a pusher assembly kink may result.Further evaluation revealed multiple kinks along the length of the pusher assembly.Some of these kinks may have been due to forceful advancement against resistance, while some of them were likely incidental and may have occurred due to packaging of the device for return to penumbra.Evaluation of the third returned ruby coil revealed that the coil was knotted out of the distal tip of the sheath and the sr wire was fractured.If the embolization coil becomes tangled outside of the microcatheter, damage such as a knot may occur.Subsequently, if the knotted coil is attempted to be retracted introducer sheath, damage such as a fractured sr wire may result.Further evaluation of the ruby coil revealed that the pusher assembly was kinked in multiple locations.If the device is forcefully advanced against resistance, damage such as a kink may occur.Some of these kinks were likely incidental to the reported issue and likely occurred due to packaging of the device for return to penumbra.The lantern identified in the complaint was not returned to penumbra for evaluation.Penumbra coils are visually inspected during in-process inspection and during quality inspection after manufacturing.The manufacturing records for this lot were reviewed and did not reveal any outstanding discrepancies, design, or quality concerns.This report is associated with mfr report number: 3005168196-2018-01502, 3005168196-2018-01504.
|
|
The patient was undergoing a coil embolization procedure in the internal illiac artery (iia) using ruby coils.During the procedure, while attempting to advance a ruby coil into a lantern delivery microcatheter (lantern) the physician experienced resistance and, consequently, the ruby coil pusher wire became kinked; therefore, it was removed.It was reported that the same issue occurred with two other ruby coil.The procedure was completed using a new ruby coil and the same lantern.There was no report of an adverse effect to the patient.
|