Zilver 518 G43791Recalls & reported problems
Cook Ireland Ltd · Zilver 518 Vascular Stent · Class 3 · Implant
All models of Zilver 518 (20)
Data updated Oct 18, 2026 from official FDA records · Editorial policy
- Adverse event reports
- 3
- Deaths reported
- 0
- Injuries reported
- 0
- Recalls naming it
- 0
Summary
The FDA's MAUDE database contains 3 adverse event reports that list this exact device (DI 10827002437910), received between Oct 3, 2018 and May 7, 2026 — classified as 3 malfunctions.
The most frequently reported specific device problem is “Activation, Positioning or Separation Problem” (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.
Reports received per month
Most reported problems
Device problems
- Activation, Positioning or Separation Problem1
- Improper or Incorrect Procedure or Method1
- No Apparent Adverse Event1
- Off-Label Use1
Patient problems
- No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions2
- No Consequences Or Impact To Patient1
Recent adverse event reports
The 3 most recent of 3 reports, in the reporter's own words as published by the FDA.
MalfunctionMay 7, 2026Improper or Incorrect Procedure or Method; No Apparent Adverse Event
DURING THE PROCEDURE, THE PHYSICIAN DEPLOYED THE STENT; HOWEVER, A PORTION OF IT WAS POSITIONED INCORRECTLY. THE DEVICE REPRESENTATIVE INDICATED THAT THERE WERE NO DEFECTS OR ISSUES WITH THE STENT ITSELF. THE PHYSICIAN PERFORMED A WIRE EXCHANGE PRIOR TO ADVANCING THE STENT; HOWEVER, THE GUIDEWIRE INADVERTENTLY TRACKED INTO AN UNINTENDED PATHWAY. AS A RESULT, WHEN THE STENT WAS DEPLOYED, IT WAS NOT POSITIONED AS EXPECTED. THE STENT ITSELF FUNCTIONED AS INTENDED. PATIENT WAS REPORTED FINE. CAN YOU CLARIFY WHAT EXACTLY IS MEANT IN THE DESCRIPTION OF EVENT: ¿¿A PORTION OF THE STENT WAS POSITIONED INCORRECTLY.¿ DOES THIS MEAN THAT A USE ERROR MAY HAVE OCCURRED AND IF SO, WHAT PART OF THE IFU WOULD THIS REFER TO? THE PHYSICIAN PERFORMED A WIRE EXCHANGE PRIOR TO ADVANCING THE STENT; HOWEVER, THE GUIDEWIRE INADVERTENTLY TRACKED INTO AN UNINTENDED PATHWAY. AS A RESULT, WHEN THE STENT WAS DEPLOYED, IT WAS NOT POSITIONED AS EXPECTED. THE STENT ITSELF FUNCTIONED AS INTENDED. WHAT WAS THE TARGET LOCATION FOR THE STENT? THE INTENDED TARGET LOCATION FOR THE STENT IS UNKNOWN, AS THE DEVICE WAS USED OFF-LABEL. WHAT DISEASE PATHOLOGY WAS BEING TREATED? UNKNOWN, AS THE DEVICE WAS USED OFF-LABEL. WAS
Patient problems: No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions
MAUDE report 25115777 ↗MalfunctionMay 26, 2021Off-Label Use; Off-Label Use
SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT BEING SUBMITTED DUE TO THE INVESTIGATION BEING COMPLETED ON 04-JUN-2021. DEVICE WAS ALSO EVALUATED IN CIRL ON 26-MAY-2021, IMAGE REVIEW CARRIED OUT ON 02-JUN-2021. PER REP - (B)(6) 2021 - THE STENT STARTED DEPLOYING BEFORE THE RED SAFETY TAB HAD BEEN PULLED OUT. THEY ENDED UP DEPLOYING IT. THE LOCATION WAS A LITTLE BIT OFF BUT THE PROCEDURE WAS SUCCESSFUL. THE STENT WAS PLACED THROUGH A CATHETER. THE STENT STARTED DEPLOYING AS THEY WERE PULLING THE CATHETER BACK TO EXPOSE THE DELIVERY SYSTEM OF THE STENT. FROM IMAGES IT LOOKS LIKE THE DEPLOYED STENT IS FRACTURED AT THE PROXIMAL TIP THAT DEPLOYED EARLY. PATIENT OTCOME: DID ANY UNINTENDED SECTION OF THE DEVICE REMAIN INSIDE THE PATIENT¿S BODY? -NO. IF YES, PLEASE DESCRIBE. WAS THE PATIENT HOSPITALIZED OR WAS THERE PROLONGED HOSPITALIZATION? -NO. DID THE PATIENT REQUIRE ANY ADDITIONAL PROCEDURES DUE TO THIS OCCURRENCE? -NO. IF YES, PLEASE DESCRIBE. DID THE PRODUCT CAUSE OR CONTRIBUTE TO THE NEED FOR ADDITIONAL PROCEDURES? -NO. IF YES, PLEASE SPECIFY ADDITIONAL PROCEDURES AND PROVIDE DETAILS. HAS THE COMPLAINANT REPORTED ANY ADVERSE EFFECTS ON THE PATIENT DUE TO THIS OCCURRENCE? -NO. HAS THE COMPLAINANT REPORTED THA
Patient problems: No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions
MAUDE report 11885306 ↗MalfunctionOct 3, 2018Activation, Positioning or Separation Problem; Activation, Positioning or Separation Problem
WHILE TRYING TO INSERT THE ZILVER 518 THROUGH A .070 SOFIA CATHETER, THE DELIVERY SYSTEM WOULD NOT ADVANCE ANY FURTHER AND MET SIGNIFICANT RESISTANCE WHILE TRYING TO WITHDRAW. UPON REMOVING THE DELIVERY SYSTEM, THE STENT WAS PARTIALLY DEPLOYED AND UNSHEATHED WITHIN THE SYSTEM. HOWEVER, THE RED DEPLOYMENT LOCK HAD NOT BEEN REMOVED AT THE TIME THAT THIS OCCURRED. THE STENT WAS DEPLOYED IN THE STERILE FIELD AND THROWN AWAY DURING CLEAN UP. THE PROCEDURE WAS COMPLETED WITH A NEURON CATHETER AND A DIFFERENT STENT ZILVER 518.
Patient problems: No Consequences Or Impact To Patient
MAUDE report 7929860 ↗
Other STENT, ILIAC devices
- Cordis S.M.A.R.T. Control Vascular Stent System C10040MLCordis US Corp. · STENT, ILIAC1 recall3 reports
- Absolute Pro 1012534-100Abbott Vascular Inc. · STENT, ILIAC51 reports
- Protégé™ GPS™ SERB65-09-60-80Ev3, Inc · STENT, ILIAC1 recall0 reports
- Cordis S.M.A.R.T. Control Vascular Stent System C09060MLCordis US Corp. · STENT, ILIAC1 recall0 reports
- Absolute Pro 1012535-100Abbott Vascular Inc. · STENT, ILIAC1 death41 reports
- Omnilink Elite 1012631-39Abbott Vascular Inc. · STENT, ILIAC27 reports
- Omnilink Elite 1012632-29Abbott Vascular Inc. · STENT, ILIAC25 reports
- Absolute Pro 1012536-100Abbott Vascular Inc. · STENT, ILIAC21 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