Skip to content

Fast-Cath™ 406128Recalls & reported problems

St. Jude Medical, Inc. · Class 2

All models of Fast-Cath (71)

Data updated Oct 16, 2026 from official FDA records · Editorial policy

Adverse event reports
5
Deaths reported
0
Injuries reported
1
Recalls naming it
0

Summary

The FDA's MAUDE database contains 5 adverse event reports that list this exact device (DI 05414734008280), received between Oct 23, 2018 and Jan 22, 2025 — classified as 1 injury, 4 malfunctions.

The most frequently reported specific device problem is “Material Puncture/Hole” (2 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 16, 2026.

Reports received per month

Nov 2023: 0 reportsDec 2023: 0 reportsJan 2024: 0 reportsFeb 2024: 0 reportsMar 2024: 0 reportsApr 2024: 0 reportsMay 2024: 0 reportsJun 2024: 1 reportsJul 2024: 0 reportsAug 2024: 0 reportsSep 2024: 0 reportsOct 2024: 0 reportsNov 2024: 0 reportsDec 2024: 0 reportsJan 2025: 1 reportsFeb 2025: 0 reportsMar 2025: 0 reportsApr 2025: 0 reportsMay 2025: 0 reportsJun 2025: 0 reportsJul 2025: 0 reportsAug 2025: 0 reportsSep 2025: 0 reportsOct 2025: 0 reportsNov 2025: 0 reportsDec 2025: 0 reportsJan 2026: 0 reportsFeb 2026: 0 reportsMar 2026: 0 reportsApr 2026: 0 reportsMay 2026: 0 reportsJun 2026: 0 reportsJul 2026: 0 reportsAug 2026: 0 reportsSep 2026: 0 reportsOct 2026: 0 reports2024202520261
Last 36 months. The most recent month may be incomplete.

Most reported problems

Device problems

  • Material Puncture/Hole2
  • Difficult to Remove1
  • Fluid/Blood Leak1
  • Material Separation1

Patient problems

  • No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions3
  • Device Embedded In Tissue or Plaque1
  • No Consequences Or Impact To Patient1

Recent adverse event reports

The 5 most recent of 5 reports, in the reporter's own words as published by the FDA.

  • MalfunctionJan 22, 2025Difficult to Remove; Difficult to Remove

    DURING CARDIOMEMS IMPLANT PROCEDURE, THE PHYSICIAN WAS UNABLE TO REMOVE THE SHEATH WHICH CAUSED A DELAY. THE PHYSICIAN COULD NOT SEPARATE THE SHEATH, WIRE, AND CARDIOMEMS DEVICES FROM EACH OTHER. DURING THE CARDIOMEMS IMPLANT, THE WIRE DID NOT HAVE THE SUPPORT TO BRING THE CARDIOMEMS SENSOR TO THE PULMONARY ARTERY. THE PHYSICIAN TRIED TO PULL THE DEVICE BACK THROUGH THE SHEATH, BUT IT FOLDED ONTO ITSELF. THE PHYSICIAN DETERMINED THAT THE SHEATH AND DEVICE COULD NOT BE SAFELY REMOVED. A SIGNIFICANT DELAY WAS REPORTED WHILE THE PHYSICIAN WAS DECIDING AN ACTION PLAN AND WAITING FOR VASCULAR SURGERY TO ARRIVE. VASCULAR SURGERY WAS CALLED AND THEY WERE ABLE TO PULL THE SHEATH OUT, BUT THE CMEMS DEVICE REMAINED IN THE SOFT TISSUE. VASCULAR SURGERY WAS ABLE TO DO A SMALL CUT DOWN AND REMOVED THE CARDIOMEMS DEVICE. THE PATIENT HAD A PERCLOSE IN PLACE AND THAT WAS UTILIZED. PATIENT REMAINED STABLE THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE PROCEDURE. THE PATIENT REMAINED STABLE THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE PROCEDURE. THE PATIENT WAS DISCHARGED AND NOT HOSPITALIZED FOLLOWING THE PROCEDURE. THERE WERE NO POST-PROCEDURE COMPLICATIONS, BUT THE PHYSICIAN REPORTED THERE TO BE A SIGNIFICANT DELAY DUE TO DECIDING THE PLAN OF

    Patient problems: No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions

    MAUDE report 21211058 ↗
  • MalfunctionJun 13, 2024Material Puncture/Hole; Material Puncture/Hole

    AT THE END OF A SUCCESSFUL IMPLANT PROCEDURE, IT WAS REPORTED THAT WHEN THE INTRODUCER WAS REMOVED FROM THE PATIENT, A HOLE WAS OBSERVED NEAR THE END OF THE SHEATH. THE PROCEDURE HAD GONE FINE AND WITH NO ADVERSE CONSEQUENCES TO THE PATIENT.

    Patient problems: No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions

    MAUDE report 19528302 ↗
  • MalfunctionFeb 28, 2023Material Puncture/Hole; Material Puncture/Hole

    DURING THE RIGHT HEART CATHETERIZATION PROCEDURE, THE SHEATH WENT IN SMOOTH ON INSERTION, HOWEVER, AFTER REMOVAL FROM THE PATIENT, THE SHEATH WAS NOTED TO BE KINKED AND PUNCTURED. THE INTRODUCER WAS NOT EXCHANGED AND THE PROCEDURE WAS COMPLETED WITH NO ADVERSE CONSEQUENCES TO THE PATIENT.

    Patient problems: No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions

    MAUDE report 16453678 ↗
  • MalfunctionDec 12, 2019Fluid/Blood Leak; Fluid/Blood Leak

    WHILE USING THE INTRODUCER, THERE WAS BLOOD LEAKING FROM THE DEVICE AFTER THE DILATOR WAS INSERTED. THE SHEATH WAS REPLACED AND THE PROCEDURE WAS COMPLETED.

    Patient problems: No Consequences Or Impact To Patient

    MAUDE report 9457394 ↗
  • InjuryOct 23, 2018Material Separation; Material Separation

    DURING A PROCEDURE THE INTRODUCER WAS BEING USED TO INSERT AND ADVANCE THE CARDIOMEMS DELIVERY CATHETER SYSTEM. AT THE END OF A PROCEDURE, UPON REMOVAL OF THE SHEATH FROM THE PATIENT'S RIGHT FEMORAL VEIN, THE DISTAL PORTION OF THE SHEATH REMAINED IN THE VESSEL WHILE THE PROXIMAL PORTION WAS RETRACTED AND REMOVED. A SNARE WAS USED TO REMOVE THE REMAINDER OF THE DEVICE. THERE WERE NO ADVERSE CONSEQUENCES TO THE PATIENT.

    Patient problems: Device Embedded In Tissue or Plaque

    MAUDE report 7995642 ↗

Other INTRODUCER, CATHETER devices

All INTRODUCER, CATHETER devices →

Sources and updates

How reports and recalls are matched · Editorial policy · Report an error on this page