| Model Number |
G29981 |
| Medical Device Problem Code |
Material Separation (1562)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Code |
No Consequences Or Impact To Patient (2199)
|
| Date of Event |
07/22/2019
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Malfunction
|
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
Occupation: unknown.Pma/510(k) number: pre-amendment.A follow-up report will be submitted should additional relevant information become available.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
As reported, during an intervention of the left superficial femoral artery involving a (b)(6) year-old male patient, a flexor ansel guiding sheath separated upon removal at the completion of the procedure.The patient reportedly had a history of an aortic graft in the abdominal area, which the complaint device possibly made contact with.Another manufacturer's wire guide, an unknown atherectomy device, and possibly an unknown balloon were used during the procedure; as well as an unspecified cook cxi device.The complaint device was placed in the left superficial femoral artery.Upon removal, the device reportedly broke in half and a wire guide was placed through the broken portion to successfully retrieve the device.Nothing was in the lumen of the device prior to removal.It is unknown if the patient's anatomy was tortuous or calcified.A section of the device did not remain inside the patient¿s body.The patient did not require any additional procedures due to this occurrence.According to the initial reporter, the patient did not experience any adverse effects due to this occurrence.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
Additional information was received noting that the dilator was not in place during removal.No resistance, however, was noted during insertion or removal.Additionally, the anatomy was not reported to be tortuous or calcified.The sheath was broken approximately 5 inches from the hemostatic valve.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
Investigation - evaluation.Reviews of the complaint history, device history record, documentation, drawing, specifications, instructions for use (ifu), manufacturer¿s instructions, and quality control procedures of the device were conducted during the investigation.The complaint device was not returned; therefore, no physical examinations could be performed.However, 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 shows 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 manufacturer¿s instructions, drawing, specifications, and quality control procedures were conducted, and no gaps were discovered.Based on the information provided and no product returned, investigation has concluded that this event can be traced to the user and unintended use error.Reportedly, the user did not reinsert the dilator prior to the removal attempt which could have let to additional force being applied to the device.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.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
This mdr is being submitted as having information not previously reported.Additional complaint investigation and record remediation was not performed.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.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
No additional information regarding the patient and/or event has been received since the previous medwatch report was sent.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|