Skip to content

Mach1™ H74934356680Recalls & reported problems

Boston Scientific Corporation · Guide Catheter · Class 2

All models of Mach1 (28)

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

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

Summary

The FDA's MAUDE database contains 1 adverse event report that list this exact device (DI 08714729351955), received between Aug 21, 2024 and Aug 21, 2024 — classified as 1 injury.

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: 0 reportsJul 2024: 0 reportsAug 2024: 1 reportsSep 2024: 0 reportsOct 2024: 0 reportsNov 2024: 0 reportsDec 2024: 0 reportsJan 2025: 0 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

  • Adverse Event Without Identified Device or Use Problem1

Patient problems

  • Vascular Dissection1

Recent adverse event reports

The 1 most recent of 1 reports, in the reporter's own words as published by the FDA.

  • InjuryAug 21, 2024Adverse Event Without Identified Device or Use Problem; Adverse Event Without Identified Device or Use Problem

    IT WAS REPORTED THAT DISSECTION OCCURRED, REQUIRING ADDITIONAL INTERVENTION. THE PATIENT WAS UNDERGOING PERCUTANEOUS CORONARY INTERVENTION. VASCULAR ACCESS WAS OBTAINED VIA THE RIGHT RADIAL ARTERY. THE 85% STENOSED, 4.0-4.5MMX53MM, ECCENTRIC, DE NOVO TARGET LESION WITH A BEND OF >45 AND <90 DEGREES WAS LOCATED IN THE SEVERELY TORTUOUS AND MODERATELY CALCIFIED MIDDLE RIGHT CORONARY ARTERY (RCA). AN OPTICROSS IMAGING CATHETER WAS USED TO STUDY THE MORPHOLOGY OF THE LESION. AFTER A MACH1 JR 4 6F GUIDE-CATHETER WAS ENGAGED COAXIALLY AND A SAMURAI GUIDEWIRE CROSSED THE LESION, PRE-DILATION WAS PERFORMED WITH A 3.50MM X 15MM EMERGE BALLOON CATHETER. WITH THE HELP OF 6F GUIDEZILLA LONG CATHETER-GUIDE EXTENSION, A 4.0MM X 20MM SYNERGY XD DRUG-ELUTING STENT (DES) WAS DEPLOYED. A 4.0MM X 12MM NC EMERGE BALLOON CATHETER WAS THEN USED FOR POST DILATION. USING THE SAME OPTICROSS DEVICE, THE PHYSICIAN NOTED THAT A TYPE E DISSECTION HAD OCCURRED FROM THE PROXIMAL TO THE OSTIAL PART OF THE RCA. THE DISSECTION WAS CONSIDERED TO HAVE BEEN CAUSED BY THE GUIDEZILLA AND MACH1 CATHETERS. WHEN THEY WERE USED RESISTANCE WAS FELT, AND THE DEVICES WERE ENGAGED DEEPLY INTO THE RCA CAUSING THE DISSECTION. THE

    Patient problems: Vascular Dissection

    MAUDE report 20021026 ↗

Other CATHETER, PERCUTANEOUS devices

All CATHETER, PERCUTANEOUS devices →

Sources and updates

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