|
Investigation/evaluation: reviews of the dimensional verification, complaint history, device history record, documentation, drawing, instructions for use (ifu), quality control, and a visual inspection of the returned device were conducted during the investigation.The visual inspection of the returned package confirmed that complaint balloon catheter was returned with the 6 french sheath on the shaft (b)(4) for investigation.Both devices had biological matter present throughout them.The balloon material appeared to have ruptured circumferentially, with a small longitudinal tear on a section.The inner shaft, below the balloon material, was elongated and thinned.There was no evidence of the product being manufactured out of specification.The elongated section of the shaft may have been caused when difficult in removing the balloon catheter was experienced.Additionally, a document based investigation evaluation was performed.A review of the device history record showed no nonconforming events which could contribute to this failure mode.It should also be noted there were no other reported complaints for this lot number.Furthermore, reviews of the drawings, quality control procedures, and the overall design history file were conducted, and no gaps were discovered.Moreover, an ifu is provided with the device.This documentation notes the device is indicated for percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (pta) of lesions in peripheral arteries; including iliac, renal, popliteal, infrapopliteal, femoral and iliofemoral; and obstructive lesions of native or synthetic arteriovenous dialysis fistulae.It does not address those lesions which have previously had a stent placed and restenosis has occurred.Upon withdrawal, negative pressure is to be maintained.The document also instructs that if balloon pressure is lost and/or the balloon ruptures, deflate the balloon and sheath as a unit.Once the balloon ruptured, negative pressure was reported to have been maintained and initially the balloon was attempted to be removed through the sheath.When the customer was having difficulties with this, the sheath and balloon were removed together, as indicated in the ifu.The case description, compared to the product labeling, provided no evidence to support the customer misused the device in a way that led to the balloon rupture.When reviewing the product labeling, also provided with the device, it was noted that this balloon device was compatible with a 5 french sheath.During the procedure, a 6 french sheath was used.However, the size should not have interfered with the performance of the balloon catheter.Based on the information provided and the examination of the returned product, investigation has concluded that a root cause for this event could not be determined.We will continue our monitoring of similar complaints and have notified the appropriate personnel of this event.Measures are being conducted to address this failure mode.Per the quality engineering risk assessment no further action is required.This report is required by the fda under 21 cfr part 803.This report is based on unconfirmed information submitted by others.Neither the submission of this report nor any statement made in it is intended to be an admission that any cook device is defective or malfunctioned; that a death or serious injury occurred; or that any cook device caused or contributed to; or is likely to cause or contribute to a death or serious injury if a malfunction occurred.
|