Surpass Evolve FDS45040Recalls & reported problems
Stryker Corporation · Flow Diverter System · Class 3 · Implant
All models of Surpass Evolve (22)
Data updated Oct 18, 2026 from official FDA records · Editorial policy
- Adverse event reports
- 4
- Deaths reported
- 0
- Injuries reported
- 2
- Recalls naming it
- 0
Summary
The FDA's MAUDE database contains 4 adverse event reports that list this exact device (DI 07613327375282), received between Oct 5, 2020 and Apr 28, 2023 — classified as 2 injuries, 2 malfunctions.
The most frequently reported specific device problem is “Activation Failure” (1 report).
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.
Most reported problems
Device problems
- Activation Failure1
- Adverse Event Without Identified Device or Use Problem1
- Difficult or Delayed Activation1
- Premature Activation1
Patient problems
- No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions2
- Stenosis1
- Vasoconstriction1
Recent adverse event reports
The 4 most recent of 4 reports, in the reporter's own words as published by the FDA.
MalfunctionApr 28, 2023Premature Activation; Premature Activation
IT WAS REPORTED, THAT DURING THE PROCEDURE, THE SUBJECT STENT DEPLOYED PREMATURELY WITHIN THE CATHETER. THE PROCEDURE WAS COMPLETED SUCCESSFULLY. NO CLINICAL CONSEQUENCES WERE REPORTED TO THE PATIENT DUE TO THIS EVENT.
Patient problems: No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions
MAUDE report 16834138 ↗InjuryAug 30, 2022Adverse Event Without Identified Device or Use Problem; Adverse Event Without Identified Device or Use Problem
IT WAS REPORTED THAT THE SUBJECT FLOW DIVERTER STENT WAS IMPLANTED IN THE CAVERNOUS SEGMENT OF THE INTERNAL CAROTID ARTERY ON (B)(6) 2021. NINE MONTHS POST PROCEDURE DURING ROUTINE FOLLOW-UP ANGIOGRAM WAS PERFORMED WHICH REVELED HUNDRED PERCENT STENOSIS OF THE PATIENT'S INTERNAL CAROTID ARTERY AND THE SUBJECT FLOW DIVERTER STENT. THERE WAS NO BLOOD FLOW DISTAL TO THE STENOSIS. IT WAS REPORTED THAT THE PATIENT WAS ASYMPTOMATIC. IT WAS REPORTED THAT THE SUBJECT FLOW DIVERTER STENT PERFORMED AS INTENDED DURING DEPLOYMENT. ACCORDING TO THE PHYSICIAN THE STENOSIS OF THE PARENT VESSEL ARTERY IS DUE TO IN SUBJECT STENT STENOSIS, BUT PATIENT DID HAVE ATHEROSCLEROSIS IN THE PARENT VESSEL ARTERY. IT WAS NOTED THAT THERE WAS PARENT VESSEL STENOSIS PRIOR TO TREATMENT ON THE PROXIMAL END OF THE ANEURYSM. NO MORE INFORMATION IS AVAILABLE.
Patient problems: Stenosis
MAUDE report 15318565 ↗MalfunctionDec 14, 2021Difficult or Delayed Activation; Difficult or Delayed Activation
IT WAS REPORTED THAT WHEN THE SUBJECT STENT WAS BEING DEPLOYED DURING THE PROCEDURE, IT BECAME TWISTED IN THE MID PORTION. THE DEVICE WAS REPLACED AND THE PROCEDURE WAS COMPLETED WITH NO CLINICAL CONSEQUENCES TO THE PATIENT.
Patient problems: No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions
MAUDE report 12992640 ↗InjuryOct 5, 2020Activation Failure; Activation Failure
IT WAS REPORTED THAT DURING THE PROCEDURE, THE SUBJECT FLOW DIVERTER WAS RESHEATHED APPROXIMATELY SEVEN TIMES AND THE PATIENT'S INTERNAL CAROTID TERMINUS VESSEL HAD VASOSPASM. THE VESSEL VASOSPASM CONSTRICTED THE SUBJECT FLOW DIVERTER AND PREVENTED IT FROM OPENING WHICH WAS REALIZED AFTER CONTRAST INJECTION. THE PHYSICIAN ADMINISTERED VERAPAMIL AND CARDAPINE TO TREAT THE VASOSPASM WHICH RESOLVED. THEN REMOVED THE DEVICE AND REPLACED IT WITH A SECOND FLOW DIVERTER WHICH HAD A PROXIMAL TWIST/KINK THAT WAS UNABLE TO BE RESOLVED WITH DEPLOYMENT. THE SECOND DEVICE WAS RESHEATHED AND REMOVED FORM THE PATIENT ANATOMY. A THIRD DEVICE WAS USED AND PROCEDURE WAS COMPLETED SUCCESSFULLY. PATIENT WAS REPORTED TO BE DOING WELL.
Patient problems: Vasoconstriction
MAUDE report 10627894 ↗
Other Intracranial aneurysm flow diverter devices
- Pipeline TM Flex Embolization Device with Shield Technology TM PED2-300-12Micro Therapeutics, Inc. · Intracranial aneurysm flow diverter2 recalls1 report
- PIPELINE PED-500-20Micro Therapeutics, Inc. · Intracranial aneurysm flow diverter1 recall31 reports
- PIPELINE PED-500-35Micro Therapeutics, Inc. · Intracranial aneurysm flow diverter1 recall1 death29 reports
- PIPELINE PED-500-16Micro Therapeutics, Inc. · Intracranial aneurysm flow diverter1 recall2 deaths27 reports
- PIPELINE PED-500-25Micro Therapeutics, Inc. · Intracranial aneurysm flow diverter1 recall1 death23 reports
- PIPELINE PED-500-30Micro Therapeutics, Inc. · Intracranial aneurysm flow diverter1 recall21 reports
- PIPELINE PED-450-25Micro Therapeutics, Inc. · Intracranial aneurysm flow diverter1 recall20 reports
- PIPELINE PED-475-30Micro Therapeutics, Inc. · Intracranial aneurysm flow diverter1 recall1 death19 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