• Decrease font size
  • Return font size to normal
  • Increase font size
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services

MAUDE Adverse Event Report: PENUMBRA, INC. PENUMBRA COIL 400; HCG, KRD

  • Print
  • Share
  • E-mail
-
Super Search Devices@FDA
510(k) | DeNovo | Registration & Listing | Adverse Events | Recalls | PMA | HDE | Classification | Standards
CFR Title 21 | Radiation-Emitting Products | X-Ray Assembler | Medsun Reports | CLIA | TPLC
 

PENUMBRA, INC. PENUMBRA COIL 400; HCG, KRD Back to Search Results
Catalog Number 4002C0935
Device Problems Failure to Advance (2524); Physical Resistance/Sticking (4012)
Patient Problem No Consequences Or Impact To Patient (2199)
Event Date 10/30/2018
Event Type  malfunction  
Manufacturer Narrative
The device has been returned and the investigation results are pending.A follow up mdr will be submitted upon completion of the device investigation.
 
Event Description
The patient was undergoing a coil embolization procedure in the left middle cerebral artery (mca) using penumbra coil 400s (pc400s).During the procedure, the physician felt resistance while attempting to advance the first coil, a pc400, through its introducer sheath and was unable to advance the pc400 beyond its starting position.The pc400 was therefore removed and was not used in the procedure.The procedure was completed using another pc400 and the same px slim delivery microcatheter (px slim).There was no report of an adverse effect to the patient.
 
Manufacturer Narrative
Results: the pet lock was intact at the proximal end of the pusher assembly.The pusher assembly had bends approximately 12.0 cm, 23.0 cm and 40.0 cm from the proximal end.The embolization coil was intact with the pusher assembly distal detachment tip (ddt).The pet bump on the pull wire was distal to the ddt.The proximal end of the embolization coil was within the introducer sheath.The embolization coil was compressed, and offset coil winds were present along the length of the coil.During functional testing, resistance was encountered while retracting the pc400 into the introducer sheath and the embolization coil became more compressed.Strong resistance was encountered while advancing the pc400 and the device could not advance out of its introducer sheath.Conclusions: evaluation of the returned pc400 revealed offset coil winds.If the introducer sheath is not seated properly within the hub of its parent catheter, resistance may be encountered while advancing.If the device is forcefully advanced against this resistance, damage such as offset coil winds will likely occur.This damage likely contributed to the reported inability to advance the coil during the procedure and functional testing.Further evaluation revealed the pull wire was distal to the ddt.This was also likely a result of forcefully advancing the device against resistance.The bends on the returned device were likely incidental to the reported complaint.Penumbra coils are 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.
 
Search Alerts/Recalls

  New Search  |  Submit an Adverse Event Report

Brand Name
PENUMBRA COIL 400
Type of Device
HCG, KRD
Manufacturer (Section D)
PENUMBRA, INC.
one penumbra place
alameda CA 94502
MDR Report Key8199341
MDR Text Key131505009
Report Number3005168196-2018-02515
Device Sequence Number1
Product Code HCG
UDI-Device Identifier00814548010588
UDI-Public00814548010588
Combination Product (y/n)Y
PMA/PMN Number
K120330
Number of Events Reported1
Summary Report (Y/N)N
Report Source Manufacturer
Source Type company representative,foreig
Type of Report Initial,Followup
Report Date 01/01/2005,11/27/2018
1 Device was Involved in the Event
1 Patient was Involved in the Event
Date FDA Received12/27/2018
Is this an Adverse Event Report? No
Is this a Product Problem Report? Yes
Device Operator Health Professional
Device Catalogue Number4002C0935
Device Lot NumberF80570
Was Device Available for Evaluation? Device Returned to Manufacturer
Date Returned to Manufacturer12/19/2018
Was the Report Sent to FDA? Yes
Date Report Sent to FDA01/01/2005
Date Report to Manufacturer01/10/2005
Date Manufacturer Received02/12/2019
Is This a Reprocessed and Reused Single-Use Device? No
Patient Sequence Number1
Patient Age78 YR
-
-