|
(b)(4): during processing of this complaint, attempts were made to obtain complete event, patient and device information.The other three armada device are being filed under separate medwatch reports.Evaluation summary: visual inspection was performed on the returned device.The reported balloon rupture 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 revealed no other incidents.The investigation determined the reported balloon rupture appears to be related to circumstances of the procedure.It is likely that the reported balloon rupture occurred due to interaction with anatomy or associated devices.There is no indication of a product quality issue with respect to the design, manufacture, or labeling of the device.The used 20/30 indeflator was also returned and tested.There was no damage or pressurization issues noted.
|
|
It was reported that the procedure was to treat an arteriovenous fistula.A 10x40mmx135cm armada 35 balloon dilatation catheter (bdc) was advanced to the target lesion without issue, however during the first inflation to 4 atmospheres (atm), the balloon ruptured.A second 10x40mmx135cm armada 35 bdc also ruptured at 4 atm.A 10x40mmx80cm armada 35 bdc ruptured at 6 atm, and a 12x40mmx80cm armada 35 bdc, ruptured at 4 atm.Although no damage was seen on the indeflator, it was stated there could be an issue with the indeflator, since the four balloons ruptured during inflation with the same indeflator.A new indeflator and an unspecified bdc were used without further issues to complete the procedure.There were no adverse patient effects and no reported clinically significant delay in the procedure.No additional information was provided.
|