|
It was reported that during an angioplasty procedure the pta balloon allegedly ruptured on the first inflation attempt.It was further reported that the balloon was unable to be removed through the 6fr sheath.When trying to remove the balloon, the outer layer of the balloon allegedly peeled off.A large sheath was placed retrograde central to the antegrade sheath with the balloon, and the ruptured balloon was shared and pulled out through the retrograde sheath.The balloon had to be cut close to the hub in order to pull it out through the second sheath.Upon removing the balloon and sheath from the patient, the patient's access site clotted off and stopped working.The patient was admitted to the hospital to have a thrombectomy the following day.
|
|
It was reported that during an angioplasty procedure the pta balloon allegedly ruptured on the first inflation attempt.It was further reported that the balloon was unable to be removed through the 6fr sheath.When trying to remove the balloon, the outer layer of the balloon allegedly peeled off.A large sheath was placed retrograde central to the antegrade sheath with the balloon, and the ruptured balloon was shared and pulled out through the retrograde sheath.The balloon had to be cut close to the hub in order to pull it out through the second sheath.Upon removing the balloon and sheath from the patient, the patient's access site clotted off and stopped working.The patient was admitted to the hospital to have a thrombectomy the following day.
|
|
Manufacturing review: a lot history review was conducted and it was determined that a device history record (dhr) review was not required.Investigation summary: the device was returned for evaluation in three segments.A visual inspection of the third segment consisting of the balloon, polyimide, and snare did not find any peeling of the balloon.Therefore, the investigation is unconfirmed for the reported peeling.In addition, the balloon was unable to be inflated due to the condition of the device.Therefore, the investigation is inconclusive for the reported balloon rupture.The device was also unable to be tested for the reported retraction issue due to the condition of the device and because the sheath used in the procedure was not returned.Therefore, the investigation is inconclusive for the reported retraction issue.However, a visual inspection of the second and third segments found a proximal balloon joint break.Therefore, the investigation is confirmed for the identified proximal balloon joint break.It is possible that the alleged balloon rupture may have contributed to the reported retraction issue.It is also possible that the identified balloon bond break may have contributed to the reported retraction issue.However, the definite root cause for the reported balloon rupture or retraction issue 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.
|