ConcertoTM NV-8-30-HELIX (UDI 00847536033597)Recalls & reported problems
Micro Therapeutics, Inc. · COIL NV-8-30-HELIX V06 · Class 2 · Implant
All models of ConcertoTM (70)
Data updated Oct 18, 2026 from official FDA records · Editorial policy
- Adverse event reports
- 8
- Deaths reported
- 0
- Injuries reported
- 0
- Recalls naming it
- 0
Summary
The FDA's MAUDE database contains 8 adverse event reports that list this exact device (DI 00847536033597), received between Jan 6, 2021 and May 21, 2024 — classified as 8 malfunctions.
The most frequently reported specific device problem is “Separation Failure” (3 reports).
Reports come from manufacturers, hospitals and patients and are not verified by the FDA. A report does not prove the device caused the event, and counts can't be used to compare devices or estimate failure rates. What reports can and can't tell you · How this data works · Data updated Oct 18, 2026.
Reports received per month
Most reported problems
Device problems
- Separation Failure3
- Detachment of Device or Device Component2
- Material Deformation2
- Physical Resistance/Sticking2
- Unintended Movement2
- Break1
- Migration1
Patient problems
- No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions8
Recent adverse event reports
The 8 most recent of 8 reports, in the reporter's own words as published by the FDA.
MalfunctionMay 21, 2024Material Deformation; Material Deformation
MEDTRONIC RECEIVED A REPORT THAT A CONCERTO COIL PUSHWIRE WAS BENT AT THE PROXIMAL END THE REPORTED DEVICE AND ACCESSORY DEVICES WERE PREPARED AS INDICATED IN THE INSTRUCTION FOR USE (IFU). THE PATIENT WAS BEING TREATED FOR AN UNRUPTURED RENAL ARTERY ANEURYSM WITH A SACCULAR MORPHOLOGY. ANEURYSM DIMENSIONS: MAX DIAMETER 7 MM, NECK DIAMETER 5 MM. THE PATIENT¿S VESSEL TORTUOSITY AND BLOOD FLOW WAS NORMAL. THERE WAS FRICTION OR DIFFICULTY DURING TESTING OR DELIVERY. CONTINUOUS FLUSH WAS ADMINISTERED DURING THE PROCEDURE. THERE WERE NO PATIENT SYMPTOMS OR COMPLICATIONS ASSOCIATED WITH THIS EVENT. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION RECEIVED THAT THE PROCEDURE WAS COMPLETED BY USING A ANOTHER CONCERTO COIL. THE WIRE WAS BENT WHEN IT WAS OPENED. THERE WERE ISSUES THAT RESULTED IN THE DAMAGE THAT WAS FOUND, IT WAS STATED THERE WAS AN INFLUENCE OF THE OPERATOR.
Patient problems: No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions
MAUDE report 19363489 ↗MalfunctionSep 12, 2022Unintended Movement; Unintended Movement
MEDTRONIC RECEIVED INFORMATION THAT 3 CONCERTO COILS HAD COMPACTION. OCCURRED ACCORDING TO THIS FOLLOW UP FORM. ASSESSMENT ABOUT RELATEDNESS. NO ADVERSE EVENT OR DEVICE DEFICIENCY REPORTED. NO OTHER INFORMATION WAS REPORTED.
Patient problems: No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions
MAUDE report 15407752 ↗MalfunctionSep 12, 2022Unintended Movement; Unintended Movement
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION RECEIVED REPORTED THAT THE LESION TREATED IN INDEX PROCEDURE: ARTERIAL-FEMORAL. THERE WAS ANGIOGRAM POST INDEX PROCEDURE ON (B)(6) 2021 WITH THE OUTCOME: SUCCESSFUL OCCLUSION.
Patient problems: No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions
MAUDE report 15407748 ↗MalfunctionMar 29, 2022Separation Failure; Separation Failure
MEDTRONIC RECEIVED INFORMATION THAT A CONCERTO COIL DID NOT DETACH. THE DEVICES WERE PREPARED ACCORDING TO THE INSTRUCTIONS FOR USE (IFU). THE COIL DID NOT DETACH FROM ITS WIRE (BOTH MANUAL AND DETACHER METHODS WERE TRIED SEVERAL TIMES). A NEW MEDTRONIC DEVICE WAS USED TO COMPLETE THE PROCEDURE. NO SYMPTOMS WERE REPORTED.
Patient problems: No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions
MAUDE report 13945734 ↗MalfunctionJul 14, 2021Detachment of Device or Device Component; Physical Resistance/Sticking; Detachment of Device or Device Component; Physical Resistance/Sticking
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION WAS RECEIVED. IT WAS REPORTED THAT THE DEVICE WAS PREPARED AS INDICATED IN THE IFU. THERE WAS NO KINK/DAMAGE OBSERVED ON THE PUSHWIRE. THE CONTINUOUS CATHETER FLUSH WAS ADMINISTERED DURING THE PROCEDURE.
Patient problems: No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions
MAUDE report 12166373 ↗MalfunctionJun 3, 2021Break; Migration; Break; Migration
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION RECEIVED REPORTED THAT IF THE PHYSICIAN INDICATED THAT IF COIL REMAINS WHERE IT IS, IT SHOULD NOT BE AN ISSUE UNLESS IT MIGRATES FURTHER. THE SURGEON WHO PERFORMED THE PROCEDURE CONSULTED WITH THE LEAD VASCULAR SURGEON AND INFORMED THE VASCULAR SURGEON OF THE MIGRATED COIL AFTER THE COMPLETED THE EMBOLIZATION PROCEDURE. THE LEAD SURGEON COMMENTED THAT THE DESIRED EMBOLIZATION RESULT IS SHOWN FROM THE REDUCED FLOW IN THE HYPOGASTRIC ARTERIES. THE COIL WAS IMPLANTED AND DETACHED AT THE INTENDED LOCATION BUT MIGRATED SLIGHTLY AFTERWARDS. POST-PROCEDURE ANGIOGRAPHY SHOWED IT HAD MIGRATED DISTALLY. THE COIL SEEMED TO BE IN THE SAME LOCATION AFTER STENT IMPLANTATION OVER THE COMMON ILIAC COVERING THE INTERNAL ILIAC. NO ADDITIONAL INTERVENTION WAS NOTED TO BE NECESSARY. THERE WAS NO VISIBLE DAMAGE OBSERVED TO THE COIL PUSHWIRE. HANDLING OF THE COIL WAS VERY CAREFUL AND IT WAS MAINTAINED AS STRAIGHT AS POSSIBLE THROUGHOUT THE PROCEDURE.
Patient problems: No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions
MAUDE report 11930403 ↗MalfunctionApr 27, 2021Separation Failure; Material Deformation; Physical Resistance/Sticking; Separation Failure; Material Deformation; Physical Resistance/Sticking
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION RECEIVED INDICATED THE COIL THAT FAILED TO DETACH WAS SUCCESSFULLY REMOVED FROM THE PATIENT, AND A REPLACEMENT CONCERTO COIL WAS USED TO COMPLETE THE PROCEDURE. THE INSTANT DETACHER WAS DISCARDED BY THE FACILITY.
Patient problems: No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions
MAUDE report 11732092 ↗MalfunctionJan 6, 2021Separation Failure; Detachment of Device or Device Component; Separation Failure; Detachment of Device or Device Component
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION RECEIVED FROM A HEALTHCARE PROVIDER (HCP), VIA A MANUFACTURING REPRESENTATIVE (REP), INDICATED THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION WAS UNKNOWN: WHETHER PREMATURE DETACHMENT OR NON-DETACHMENT OCCURRED, HOW MANY DETACHMENT ATTEMPTS WERE MADE WITH THE INSTANT DETACHER OR MANUAL METHOD, IF THERE WERE ANY ISSUES ENCOUNTERED PRIOR TO NON-DETACHMENT, IF THERE WAS ANY DAMAGE TO THE PUSHWIRE, IF THE COIL WAS IMPLANTED OR REMOVED FROM THE PATIENT, AND LESION CHARACTERISTICS.
Patient problems: No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions
MAUDE report 11124157 ↗
Other Device, Vascular, for Promoting Embolization devices
- POD RBYPOD8-APenumbra, Inc. · Device, Vascular, For Promoting Embolization195 reports
- CEREPAKTM MDH1Cerenovus, Inc. · Device, Vascular, for Promoting Embolization1 recall72 reports
- Azur CX Detachable 45-750824Microvention, Inc. · Device, Vascular, for Promoting Embolization115 reports
- Tornado G08261Cook Incorporated · Device, Vascular, for Promoting Embolization2 recalls7 reports
- Optima Coil System OPTI0930CSFMXBalt USA LLC · Device, Vascular, For Promoting Embolization2 recalls4 reports
- Optima Coil System OPTI0720CSFMXBalt USA LLC · Device, Vascular, For Promoting Embolization2 recalls4 reports
- Prestige Coil System PRES0520HPKPLBalt USA LLC · Device, Vascular, For Promoting Embolization2 recalls3 reports
- Optima Coil System OPTI0413CSFMXBalt USA LLC · Device, Vascular, For Promoting Embolization2 recalls3 reports
Sources and updates
- Device record: FDA GUDID, file dated Oct 13, 2026 · View this device in AccessGUDID ↗
- Adverse event reports: FDA MAUDE, file dated Oct 14, 2026 · each report above links to its original FDA record
- Recalls: FDA Medical Device Recalls, file dated Oct 16, 2026
- Page last rebuilt: Oct 18, 2026. Data downloaded through openFDA, which notes it is not validated for clinical or regulatory use.
How reports and recalls are matched · Editorial policy · Report an error on this page