| Catalog Number |
RBY4C1650 |
| Medical Device Problem Codes |
Failure to Advance (2524); Physical Resistance/Sticking (4012)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Code |
No Consequences Or Impact To Patient (2199)
|
| Date of Event |
09/14/2018
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Malfunction
|
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
Results: the pet lock was intact on the proximal end of the pusher assembly.The pusher assembly was kinked approximately 5.0 and 90.0 cm from the proximal end.The embolization coil was intact with its pusher assembly.The introducer sheath was ovalized approximately 6.0 cm from the distal tip.Resistance was encountered as the embolization coil met the ovalization in the introducer sheath and the ruby coil could not be advanced any further.Conclusions: evaluation of the returned ruby coil revealed that the introducer sheath was ovalized.If the rotating hemostasis valve (rhv) is overtightened on the introducer sheath during use, damage such as ovalization may occur.The ovalization in the introducer sheath likely prevented the ruby coil from being advanced out of its sheath and into the lantern during the procedure.Further evaluation of the returned ruby coil revealed that the pusher assembly was kinked.These kinks were likely incidental to the reported issue and may have occurred while packaging the device for return to penumbra.The lantern identified in the complaint was not returned to penumbra for evaluation.Penumbra coils and catheters 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.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
The patient was undergoing was coil embolization procedure to treat a renal artery pseudo aneurysm using ruby coils.During the procedure, the physician deployed a ruby coil in the target vessel using a lantern delivery microcatheter (lantern).Next, the physician attempted to advance a new ruby coil out of its introducer into the lantern; however, the ruby coil would not advance.It was reported that there was a hard stop and after three failed attempts, the ruby coil was removed.The procedure was completed using a new ruby coil and the same lantern.There was no report of an adverse effect to the patient.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|