|
|
| Catalog Number |
RBYPODJ30 |
| Medical Device Problem Code |
Failure to Advance (2524)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Code |
No Consequences Or Impact To Patient (2199)
|
| Date of Event |
10/22/2019
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Malfunction
|
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
This device is available for return.A follow up mdr will be submitted upon completion of the device investigation.This report is associated with mfr report numbers: 3005168196-2019-02136; 3005168196-2019-02137; 3005168196-2019-02139.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
The patient was undergoing a coil embolization procedure in the splenic artery using pod packing coils (podjs) and a ruby coil.It was noted that the patient¿s anatomy was tortuous.During the procedure, the physician placed a pod6 in the target vessel using a non-penumbra microcatheter.Next, the physician attempted to advance a podj (f84471); however, the coil would not advance through the microcatheter; therefore, the podj was removed.The physician then attempted to advance two new podjs (f84743 and f91605) and a ruby coil (f80309); however, the same issue occurred, and the coils would not advance through the microcatheter.Therefore, the podjs and ruby coil were removed.The procedure was then completed using a non-penumbra embolic agent in order to not lose access to the tortuous vessel.There was no report of an adverse effect to the patient.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
Results: the pet lock was intact on the device.The embolization coil had offset coil winds along its length.Upon functional testing, the embolization coil was able to advance part way out of its sheath and into a demonstration microcatheter; however, it became stuck in the hub due to the offset coil winds.Conclusions: evaluation of the returned first pod packing coil, the third pod packing coil and the ruby coil revealed offset coil winds on all three embolization coils.If the introducer sheath is not properly aligned with the hub of the microcatheter, or the coil is advanced against resistance, damage such as offset coil winds may occur.Offset coil winds may then contribute to additional resistance.The second pod packing coil was unable to be functionally tested due to the returned damages.In addition, the embolization coil was not returned for evaluation.Therefore, the reported complaint could not be confirmed, and potential cause could not be determined.Penumbra coils are 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.This report is associated with mfr report numbers: 3005168196-2019-02136 3005168196-2019-02137 3005168196-2019-02139.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|
|
|