(b)(4).During processing of this complaint, attempts were made to obtain complete event, patient and device information.(b)(4).The device is expected to be returned for evaluation.It has not yet been received.A follow up report will be submitted with all additional relevant information.
|
(b)(4).Correction: (b)(6).Evaluation summary: a visual and functional 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.It was reported that the armada 35 was being used to treat an iliac vein.It should be noted that the indication for use listed in the armada 35 instruction for use (ifu) states: the device is intended for dilatation of lesions in the renal, iliac, femoral, popliteal, tibial, and peroneal arteries and for the treatment of obstructive lesions of native or synthetic arteriovenous dialysis fistulae.The investigation determined the reported balloon rupture appears to be related to circumstances of the procedure.There is no indication of a product quality issue with respect to the design, manufacture, or labeling of the device.
|