| Catalog Number |
4006C0204 |
| Medical Device Problem Code |
Physical Resistance/Sticking (4012)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Code |
No Consequences Or Impact To Patient (2199)
|
| Date of Event |
12/12/2018
|
|
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 111.0 cm and 131.0 cm from the proximal end.The embolization coil was intact with its pusher assembly.The embolization coil had offset coil winds on the distal tip and coagulated blood.Conclusions: evaluation of the returned pc400 revealed that the embolization coil had offset coil winds.These offset coil winds likely contributed to the difficulty advancing the pc400 within its sheath.This type of damage typically occurs if embolization coil is forcefully advanced against resistance.The root cause of the initial resistance could not be determined.Further evaluation of the returned pc400 revealed that the distal tip of the embolization coil had coagulated blood on it.If an rhv is not used during the procedure, it is likely that the blood will backflow into the sheath and coagulate on the device.During functional testing, the pc400 was able to be advanced out of its introducer sheath with some resistance as the offset coil winds with coagulated blood exited the distal tip of the introducer sheath.The lantern identified in the complaint was not returned to penumbra for evaluation.Penumbra coils 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 a coil embolization procedure in the internal iliac artery (iia) using penumbra coil 400s (pc400s).During the procedure, the physician experienced resistance after advancing the pc400 approximately three centimeters into the introducer sheath; therefore, the pc400 was removed.The physician then attempted to insert the same pc400 without using the rotating hemostasis valve (rhv); however, experienced resistance in the same area.Therefore, the pc400 was removed.The procedure was completed using a new pc400 with the same lantern delivery microcatheter (lantern).There was no report of an adverse effect to the patient.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|