|
It was reported, a patient of unknown gender and age was undergoing a leg angiography procedure utilizing a performer introducer for initial access into the common femoral artery.The device had been in place approximately five minutes when they withdrew the dilator and noted the wire had punctured the dilator in the midshaft region.It appeared the dilator material was very thin.The patient's anatomy was not tortuous, calcified, or scarred.The procedure was completed without any adverse effects to the patient.
|
|
Investigation ¿ evaluation.Reviews of the complaint history, device history record, manufacturer¿s instructions, quality control, specifications, and a functional rest & visual inspection of the returned device were conducted during the investigation.The visual inspection of the returned package confirmed that one performer introducer was returned to cook for investigation.A slice was noted 15.7cm from the fitting (as if cut with a sharp object) and were approximately 8mm in length.It was noted to be a smooth cut.A.035 in wire guide passed through the dilator without resistance.Biomatter was pushed out of the deice as the wire guide was run through.Investigation attempted to puncture the dilator with another wire unsuccessfully, so the failure mode could not be duplicated.Additionally, a document based investigation evaluation was performed.There is no evidence to suggest the product was not made to specifications.A review of the device history record showed no nonconforming events which could contribute to this failure mode.It should be noted there was one other complaint with the device from the same lot has been received from the field.They occurred at the same facility in the same day and the failures are identical.Furthermore, reviews of the manufacturer¿s instructions, drawings, specifications, and quality control procedures were conducted, and no gaps were discovered.An ifu is not provided with this device that speaks for this specific failure mode.Based on the information provided and the examination of the returned product, investigation has concluded that a root cause for this event cannot be established.We will continue our monitoring of similar complaints and have notified the appropriate personnel of this event.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.
|