| Catalog Number |
RBY2C0320 |
| Medical Device Problem Codes |
Failure to Advance (2524); Physical Resistance/Sticking (4012)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Code |
No Consequences Or Impact To Patient (2199)
|
| Date of Event |
09/02/2019
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Malfunction
|
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
Results: the pet lock was intact on the proximal end of the pusher assembly.The embolization coil was intact with the pusher assembly and had offset coil winds along its length.Upon functional testing, the ruby coil was unable to be manipulated within its introducer sheath due to the offset coil winds.Conclusions: evaluation of the returned ruby coil revealed that the embolization coil had offset coil winds along its length.If the introducer sheath is not properly aligned within the hub of a parent device prior to advancement, resistance may be experienced.If the device is forcefully advanced against resistance, damage such as offset coil winds may occur.The offset coil winds likely contributed to the resistance experienced during the procedure and functional testing.The lantern used in the procedure was not returned 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 gastroduodenal artery (gda) using ruby coils.During the process, while advancing the ruby coil about 3-5 cm using a lantern delivery microcatheter (lantern), the physician experienced resistance and was not able to advance further; therefore, the ruby coil was removed.The physician then attempted to advance the ruby coil into a bowl of saline on the back table and experienced resistance.The ruby coil was re-sheathed and no longer used in the procedure.The procedure was completed using other ruby coils and the same lantern.There was no report of an adverse effect to the patient.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|