| Model Number |
M0035421020 |
| Medical Device Problem Code |
Premature Separation (4045)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Code |
No Consequences Or Impact To Patient (2199)
|
| Date of Event |
01/06/2020
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Malfunction
|
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
Due to the automated mes system (manufacturing execution system), there are controls in the manufacturing process to ensure the product met specifications upon release.The subject device was not returned for analysis; therefore, physical as well as a functional testing could not be performed.The reported issue is covered in the device directions for use.The risk of the reported event is documented in the risk documentation and there are current controls to mitigate the risk of the as reported event.Additional information provided by the customer indicated that intermittent flush was maintained.It is probable that insufficient flush caused the main coil prematurely detachment during use.As per the dfu, ¿in order to achieve optimal performance of the target detachable coil system and to reduce the risk of thromboembolic complications, it is critical that a continuous infusion of appropriate flush solution be maintained between a) the femoral sheath and guiding catheter, b) the 2-tip microcatheter and guiding catheters, and c) the 2-tip microcatheter and stryker neurovascular guidewire and delivery wire.Continuous flush also reduces the potential for thrombus formation on, and crystallization of infusate around, the detachment zone of the target detachable coil.¿ based on the investigation results and available information an assignable cause of user error will be assigned to this complaint.Issue investigation confirmed that there was an act or omission of an act that resulted in a different medical device response than intended by the manufacturer and/or expected by the user.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
It was reported that during procedure, the coil (subject device) was mechanically deployed at the bleeding point of the gastroduodenal artery (gda) before any detachment with the detachment system.The operation was successfully completed with an additional coil.It was reported that the vessel anatomy was very tortuous.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
It was reported that during procedure, the coil (subject device) was mechanically deployed at the bleeding point of the gastroduodenal artery (gda) before any detachment with the detachment system.The operation was successfully completed with an additional coil.It was reported that the vessel anatomy was very tortuous.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
Due to the automated mes system (manufacturing execution system), there are controls in the manufacturing process to ensure the product met specifications upon release.The subject device was not returned for analysis; therefore, physical as well as a functional testing could not be performed.The reported event could not be confirmed; the reported issue is covered in the device directions for use.The risk of the reported event is documented in the risk documentation and there are current controls to mitigate the risk of the as reported event.Additional information provided by the customer indicated that intermittent flush was maintained.It is probable that insufficient flush caused the main coil prematurely detachment during use.As per the dfu, ¿in order to achieve optimal performance of the target detachable coil system and to reduce the risk of thromboembolic complications, it is critical that a continuous infusion of appropriate flush solution be maintained between a) the femoral sheath and guiding catheter, b) the 2-tip microcatheter and guiding catheters, and c) the 2-tip microcatheter and stryker neurovascular guidewire and delivery wire.Continuous flush also reduces the potential for thrombus formation on, and crystallization of infusate around, the detachment zone of the target detachable coil¿.Based on the investigation results and available information, an assignable cause of user error will be assigned to this complaint.Issue investigation confirmed that there was an act or omission of an act that resulted in a different medical device response than intended by the manufacturer and/or expected by the user.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|