| Catalog Number |
CDF10015230 |
| Medical Device Problem Codes |
Stretched (1601); Physical Resistance/Sticking (4012)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Code |
No Consequences Or Impact To Patient (2199)
|
| Date of Event |
08/03/2019
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Malfunction
|
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
Product complaint #: (b)(4).Information regarding patient weight, height, medical history, race, and ethnicity was not reported.Procode: krd/hcg.Initial reporter: the customer contact information, including name, occupation, phone, fax, and e-mail address, was not reported.Manufacturing site name: codman and shurtleff inc., dba depuy synthes products, inc.(b)(4).The device is available to be returned for evaluation and testing.However, it has not been received to date.If the device returns, a device investigation will be performed.The company is seeking this information through the event investigation.A supplemental report will be submitted if new facts arise which materially alter information submitted in a previous mdr report.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
As reported by a healthcare professional, during a coil embolization, a 1.5mmx2cm deltapaq cere coil (cdf10015430, s14242) was being used as the first coil, however, the coil couldn't be advanced nor retrieved by the physician.The physician pulled the coil and the unknown microcatheter at the same time.After inspection it turns out to be stretched.The physician used a same like product.The procedure was successfully finished.There was no report of patient injury.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
Product complaint#: (b)(4).Updated sections on this report: d10 (concomitant medical products), g4 (pma/510k), h2 (if follow-up, what type), h3 (device evaluated by mfr), h6 and h10.Complaint conclusion: as reported by a healthcare professional, during a coil embolization, a 1.5mmx2cm deltapaq cere coil (cdf10015430, s14242) was being used as the first coil, however, the coil couldn't be advanced nor retrieved by the physician.The physician pulled the coil and the unknown microcatheter at the same time.After inspection it turns out to be stretched.The physician used a same like product.The procedure was successfully finished.There was no report of patient injury.One non-sterile unit deltapaq cere 1.5mmx2cm was received inside of a pouch.The hub, the dpu and the introducer were inspected, and no damages were noted on them.The re-sheathing tool was inspected and it was found in good conditions.The v-notch was inspected under microscope and no damages were noted on it.The rh was inspected under microscope and it was found in good conditions.The embolic coil was inspected under microscope and no damages were found on it.A lab sample prowler select plus was flushing using a lab sample syringe.After that, the unit deltapaq cere 1.5mmx2cm was introduced in to a lab sample prowler select plus and it advance, no resistance/friction was felt.A manufacturing record evaluation was performed for the finished device s14242 number, and no non-conformances related to the reported complaint condition were identified.The complaint reported by the customer ¿detachable coil delivery system (dcs) - impeded in microcatheter with loss of cerebral target position¿ was not confirmed due to in the functional test the received device could pass through the mc.The complaint reported by the customer ¿coil - unraveled/stretched-in microcatheter¿ was not confirmed due to no damages were found on the embolic coil.Neither the analysis nor the mre suggest that the failure reported by the costumer could be related to the manufacturing process.Assignment of root cause for the events remains speculative and inconclusive, based on the limited information provided.However, it is possible that clinical and procedural factors, including device manipulation / interaction, aneurysm size and vessel characteristics, device selection, and the concomitant microcatheter, may have contributed to the reported issues.Assignment of root cause for the event remains speculative and inconclusive, based on the limited information provided and without the return of the complaint devices; however, it is possible that clinical and procedural factors, including device manipulation / interaction, aneurysm size and vessel characteristics, device selection, and the concomitant microcatheter, may have contributed to the reported issue.Multiple attempts to obtain additional information were unsuccessful.The instructions for use (ifu) warns that if the microcoil system becomes immobile in the infusion microcatheter, apply a gentle push-pull motion to free it.If unsuccessful, remove both microcatheter and microcoil system together as a unit and replace with new devices.As part of the post market surveillance program, information from this complaint is trended to identify statistical signals for consideration of further correction action.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|
|