|
H10: manufacturing review: the device history records were reviewed with special attention to the raw materials, subassemblies, manufacturing process and quality control testing.This lot met all release criteria.There was nothing found to indicate there was a manufacturing related cause for this event.Investigation summary: the device was returned for evaluation.An attempt was made to inflate the balloon and a partial circumferential rupture was noted in the balloon.Therefore, the investigation is confirmed for a circumferential rupture.However, the investigation is inconclusive for the reported retraction issues and no retraction related damage was noted to the device and as the device was unable to be fully functionally tested due to the rupture.Per the reported event details, the target lesion was calcified and a wall stent was present during the procedure.Therefore, it is possible that patient and/or procedural issues contributed to the event.However, it is likely that the identified rupture contributed to the reported retraction issue.However, the definitive root cause for the identified rupture could not be determined based upon the available information.Labeling review: the review of the ifu (instructions for use), indications, warnings, precautions, cautions, possible complications, and contraindications showed that the product labeling is adequate.H11: h3, h6 (results 1, conclusion 1).H11:section a through f - the information provided by bd represents all of the known information at this time.Despite good faith efforts to obtain additional information, the complainant / reporter was unable or unwilling to provide any further patient, product, or procedural details to bd.
|