|
As reported, during an unknown procedure via access in the femoral artery, a micropuncture transitionless access set hub separated from the outer catheter upon removal of the device.Resistance was not reported during the procedure and details of the patient's anatomy are unknown.The device was used to facilitate placement of a larger wire guide.Kinking was not observed.The procedure was successfully completed with the complaint device.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 summary: as reported, during an unknown procedure via access in the femoral artery, a micropuncture transitionless access set hub separated from the outer catheter upon removal of the device.Resistance was not reported during the procedure and details of the patient's anatomy are unknown.The device was used to facilitate placement of a larger wire guide.Kinking was not observed.The procedure was successfully completed with the complaint device.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.Investigation ¿ evaluation.A review of the complaint history, device history record, documentation, manufacturing instructions, quality control procedures, specifications, and a visual inspection of unused product were conducted during the investigation.The complaint device was not returned; however, three unused devices from the same product lot were returned by the user facility.All returned devices were undamaged, and all hubs were secure.A document-based investigation evaluation was performed.A review of the design history record revealed no related nonconformances for this lot.It should be noted that there have been no other complaints associated with this lot number.Cook has concluded that sufficient inspection activities are in place to identify this failure mode prior to distribution.The information provided upon review of the complaint file provides evidence to support that the device and items in the lot were manufactured to specification.Based on the information provided, investigation has concluded that a cause for the device failure could not be established.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 and is based on unconfirmed information submitted by others.Neither the submission of this report nor any statement contained herein is intended to be an admission that any cook device is defective or malfunctioned, that a death or serious injury occurred, nor that any cook device caused, contributed to, or is likely to cause or contribute to a death or serious injury if a malfunction occurred.
|