Lantern Delivery CatheterRecalls & reported problems across all models
Penumbra, Inc. · 11 models in the FDA device registry
Data updated Oct 16, 2026 from official FDA records · Editorial policy
- Adverse event reports
- 817
- Deaths reported
- 0
- Injuries reported
- 12
- Recalls
- 0
We found 11 models of Lantern Delivery Catheter by Penumbra, Inc. in the FDA's device registry (GUDID). Together they are named in 817 adverse event reports in the FDA's MAUDE database, received between Jan 30, 2016 and Sep 29, 2026 — classified as 12 injuries, 805 malfunctions.
The most frequently reported specific device problem is “Physical Resistance/Sticking” (316 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. Widely used products collect more reports, so totals can't be used to compare products or estimate failure rates. Only reports that name a model's exact device identifier are counted. What reports can and can't tell you · How this data works
Reports received per month, all models
Most reported Lantern Delivery Catheter problems
Device problems
- Physical Resistance/Sticking316
- Material Deformation158
- Break119
- Failure to Advance115
- Fracture85
- Physical Resistance79
- Mechanical Problem76
- Kinked74
Patient problems
- No Consequences Or Impact To Patient546
- No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions299
- No Patient Involvement43
- Foreign Body In Patient4
- Vasoconstriction2
- Calcium Deposits/Calcification1
- Device Embedded In Tissue or Plaque1
- Embolism1
Lantern Delivery Catheter models
11 models, most reported first. Each model has its own page with its reports, recalls and device details.
- Lantern Delivery Catheter PXSLIMLAN135T45CATHETER, PERCUTANEOUS220 reports
- Lantern Delivery Catheter PXSLIMLAN135STRCATHETER, PERCUTANEOUS183 reports
- Lantern Delivery Catheter PXSLIMLAN150T45CATHETER, PERCUTANEOUS140 reports
- Lantern Delivery Catheter PXSLIMLAN115T45CATHETER, PERCUTANEOUS121 reports
- Lantern Delivery Catheter PXSLIMLAN150STRCATHETER, PERCUTANEOUS66 reports
- Lantern Delivery Catheter PXSLIMLAN115STRCATHETER, PERCUTANEOUS39 reports
- Lantern Delivery Catheter PXSLIMLAN135T90CATHETER, PERCUTANEOUS22 reports
- Lantern Delivery Catheter PXSLIMLAN150T90CATHETER, PERCUTANEOUS17 reports
- Lantern Delivery Catheter PXSLIMLAN115T90CATHETER, PERCUTANEOUS5 reports
- Lantern Delivery Catheter PXSLIMLAN160STRCATHETER, PERCUTANEOUS3 reports
- Lantern Delivery Catheter PXSLIMLAN160T45CATHETER, PERCUTANEOUS1 report
Recent Lantern Delivery Catheter adverse event reports
The 15 most recent reports across all models, in the reporter's own words as published by the FDA.
MalfunctionSep 29, 2026Fracture
Patient problems: No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions
MAUDE report 50935809 ↗MalfunctionSep 21, 2026Fracture
Patient problems: No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions
MAUDE report 50848844 ↗MalfunctionAug 27, 2026Fracture
The patient was undergoing a coil embolization procedure in the right peroneal artery using a Lantern Delivery Microcatheter (Lantern) and a glide catheter (4F). While removing the Lantern from the patient, the physician observed that the Lantern fractured at the midshaft within the glide catheter. The fracture was confirmed under fluoroscopy. Aspiration was applied to the glide catheter, and the glide catheter containing the fractured segment of the Lantern was removed from the patient.The procedure was completed using a new Lantern. There was no report of an adverse effect to the patient.
Patient problems: No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions
MAUDE report 50475665 ↗MalfunctionAug 26, 2026Fracture
Patient problems: No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions
MAUDE report 50454053 ↗MalfunctionAug 6, 2026Fracture
Patient problems: No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions
MAUDE report 50159135 ↗MalfunctionJun 11, 2026Fracture
THE PATIENT WAS UNDERGOING A COIL EMBOLIZATION PROCEDURE IN THE SUPERIOR MESENTERIC ARTERY (SMA) USING A LANTERN DELIVERY MICROCATHETER (LANTERN), PENUMBRA COILS AND A NON-PENUMBRA CATHETER (5FR). IT WAS NOTED THAT THE PATIENT¿S ANATOMY WAS VERY TORTUOUS. WHILE ADVANCING THE LANTERN TOWARD THE TARGET LOCATION, THE PHYSICIAN NOTICED UNDER FLUOROSCOPY THAT THE LANTERN FRACTURED AT THE MID-SHAFT WITHIN THE DISTAL TARGET ARTERY. A GUIDEWIRE WAS ADVANCED THROUGH THE FRACTURED SEGMENT, AND BOTH THE GUIDEWIRE AND THE FRACTURED LANTERN WERE REMOVED. THE PROCEDURE WAS COMPLETED USING ANOTHER LANTERN AND FOUR COILS. THERE WAS NO REPORT OF AN ADVERSE EFFECT TO THE PATIENT.
Patient problems: No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions
MAUDE report 25480419 ↗MalfunctionApr 16, 2026Fracture
THE PATIENT WAS UNDERGOING A MEDICAL PROCEDURE IN THE PULMONARY VEIN USING A LANTERN DELIVERY MICROCATHETER (LANTERN). WHILE RETRACTING THE LANTERN UNDER FLUOROSCOPY FOR REPOSITIONING, THE PHYSICIAN OBSERVED THAT THE CATHETER WAS FRACTURED. IT WAS REPORTED THAT THE LANTERN REMAINED SUFFICIENTLY INTACT TO ALLOW REMOVAL BY HAND. THE PROCEDURE WAS COMPLETED USING ANOTHER LANTERN. THERE WAS NO REPORT OF AN ADVERSE EFFECT TO THE PATIENT.
Patient problems: No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions
MAUDE report 24900197 ↗MalfunctionMar 31, 2026Fracture
THE PATIENT WAS UNDERGOING A COIL EMBOLIZATION PROCEDURE IN THE INFERIOR MESENTERIC ARTERY (IMA) USING A LANTERN DELIVERY MICROCATHETER (LANTERN), COILS, AND A NON-PENUMBRA SHEATH. A LANTERN WAS ADVANCED, AND TWO COILS WERE DELIVERED. HOWEVER, WHILE ADVANCING THE THIRD COIL THROUGH THE LANTERN, THE PHYSICIAN NOTICED THAT THE LANTERN HAD FRACTURED AT BOTH THE PROXIMAL AND DISTAL ENDS. ALTHOUGH DAMAGED, THE LANTERN WAS ABLE TO BE PULLED BACK THROUGH THE SHEATH. THE PROCEDURE WAS COMPLETED USING A NEW LANTERN AND THE SAME SHEATH. THERE WAS NO REPORT OF AN ADVERSE EFFECT TO THE PATIENT.
Patient problems: No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions
MAUDE report 24747571 ↗MalfunctionMar 24, 2026Fracture
THE PATIENT WAS UNDERGOING A MEDICAL PROCEDURE IN THE INTERNAL ILIAC ARTERY TO TREAT A TYPE II ENDOLEAK USING A LANTERN DELIVERY MICROCATHETER (LANTERN). DURING THE PROCEDURE, WHILE ADVANCING THE LANTERN, THE PHYSICIAN NOTICED THAT THE LANTERN WOULD NOT ADVANCE. THE PHYSICIAN DECIDED TO REMOVE THE LANTERN. THE LANTERN WAS REMOVED. AFTER REMOVAL OF THE LANTERN, THE PHYSICIAN NOTICED THAT THE LANTERN WAS FRACTURED AT THE MIDSHAFT. THE PROCEDURE WAS COMPLETED USING ANOTHER LANTERN. THERE WAS NO REPORT OF AN ADVERSE EFFECT TO THE PATIENT.
Patient problems: No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions
MAUDE report 24676672 ↗MalfunctionMar 20, 2026Fracture
THE PATIENT WAS UNDERGOING A COIL EMBOLIZATION PROCEDURE USING A LANTERN DELIVERY MICROCATHETER (LANTERN) AND RUBY COILS. THE PHYSICIAN PLACED TWO RUBY COILS IN THE TARGET LOCATION USING THE LANTERN. AFTER PLACING THE EMBOLIZATION COILS, THE LANTERN HAD FRACTURED. THE PHYSICIAN WAS ABLE TO SUCCESSFULLY REMOVE THE FRACTURED LANTERN. IT WAS ALSO REPORTED THAT A SECOND LANTERN FRACTURED DURING THE PROCEDURE AND THE LANTERN WAS REMOVED. THE PROCEDURE WAS COMPLETED USING A NEW LANTERN AND ADDITIONAL RUBY COILS. THERE WAS NO REPORT OF AN ADVERSE EFFECT TO THE PATIENT.
Patient problems: No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions
MAUDE report 24650810 ↗MalfunctionMar 20, 2026Fracture
THE PATIENT WAS UNDERGOING A COIL EMBOLIZATION PROCEDURE USING A LANTERN DELIVERY MICROCATHETER (LANTERN) AND RUBY COILS. THE PHYSICIAN PLACED TWO RUBY COILS IN THE TARGET LOCATION USING THE LANTERN. AFTER PLACING THE EMBOLIZATION COILS, THE LANTERN HAD FRACTURED. THE PHYSICIAN WAS ABLE TO SUCCESSFULLY REMOVE THE FRACTURED LANTERN. IT WAS ALSO REPORTED THAT A SECOND LANTERN FRACTURED DURING THE PROCEDURE AND THE LANTERN WAS REMOVED. THE PROCEDURE WAS COMPLETED USING A NEW LANTERN AND ADDITIONAL RUBY COILS. THERE WAS NO REPORT OF AN ADVERSE EFFECT TO THE PATIENT.
Patient problems: No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions
MAUDE report 24650799 ↗MalfunctionMar 16, 2026Fracture
THE PATIENT WAS UNDERGOING A COIL EMBOLIZATION PROCEDURE USING A LANTERN DELIVERY MICROCATHETER (LANTERN) AND A BASE CATHETER. DURING THE PROCEDURE, WHILE ADVANCING THE LANTERN THROUGH THE BASE CATHETER OVER A GUIDEWIRE AND INTO THE TARGET LOCATION, THE LANTERN FRACTURED IN THE PATIENT. THE PHYSICIAN WAS ABLE TO PULL OUT THE ENTIRE FRACTURED LANTERN BY HAND AND SUCCESSFULLY REMOVE IT. THE PROCEDURE WAS COMPLETED USING A NEW LANTERN AND THE SAME BASE CATHETER. THERE WAS NO REPORT OF AN ADVERSE EFFECT TO THE PATIENT.
Patient problems: No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions
MAUDE report 24602415 ↗MalfunctionMar 13, 2026Fracture
THE PATIENT WAS UNDERGOING A MEDICAL PROCEDURE IN THE GASTRODUODENAL ARTERY (GDA) USING A LANTERN DELIVERY MICROCATHETER (LANTERN) AND A PARENT CATHETER. IT WAS NOTED THAT THE PATIENT¿S ANATOMY WAS TORTUOUS. DURING THE PROCEDURE, WHILE ATTEMPTING TO ACCESS THE VESSEL USING THE LANTERN AND PARENT CATHETER FOR APPROXIMATELY AN HOUR, THE PHYSICIAN NOTICED THE DISTAL END OF THE LANTERN WAS FRACTURED. THE PHYSICIAN WAS ABLE TO PULL AND REMOVE THE FRACTURED LANTERN OUT FROM THE PARENT CATHETER. THE PROCEDURE WAS COMPLETED USING A NEW LANTERN. THERE WAS NO REPORT OF AN ADVERSE EFFECT TO THE PATIENT.
Patient problems: No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions
MAUDE report 24597898 ↗MalfunctionJan 7, 2026Fracture
THE PATIENT WAS UNDERGOING A COIL EMBOLIZATION PROCEDURE USING A LANTERN DELIVERY MICROCATHETER (LANTERN), A GUIDE CATHETER, NON-PENUMBRA COILS, MICROSPHERES, A CONTRAST AGENT, SALINE, AND A GUIDEWIRE. DURING THE PROCEDURE, THE PHYSICIAN SUCCESSFULLY IMPLANTED MICROSPHERES, TWO NON-PENUMBRA COILS INTO THE TARGET VESSEL USING THE LANTERN. IT WAS ALSO REPORTED THAT CONTRAST AGENT AND SALINE WERE ALSO ADMINISTERED THROUGH THE LANTERN. THE PHYSICIAN THEN NOTICED THAT THE LANTERN WASN¿T PERFORMING AS EXPECTED AND DECIDED TO REMOVE IT. UPON REMOVAL, THE PHYSICIAN NOTICED THAT THE LANTERN FRACTURED AT ITS DISTAL SEGMENT. THE PROCEDURE WAS COMPLETED USING A PX SLIM DELIVERY MICROCATHETER (PX SLIM). THERE WAS NO REPORT OF AN ADVERSE EFFECT TO THE PATIENT.
Patient problems: No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions
MAUDE report 23995581 ↗MalfunctionDec 12, 2025Fracture; Fracture
THE PATIENT WAS UNDERGOING A COIL EMBOLIZATION PROCEDURE IN THE INFERIOR MESENTERIC ARTERY (IMA) USING A LANTERN DELIVERY MICROCATHETER (LANTERN) AND A DIAGNOSTIC CATHETER. DURING THE PROCEDURE, THE PHYSICIAN WAS RETRACTING THE LANTERN FROM THE DIAGNOSTIC CATHETER TO REPOSITION THE LANTERN AND NOTICED THAT THE LANTERN HAD FRACTURED AT THE MIDSHAFT. THEREFORE, THE DIAGNOSTIC CATHETER CONTAINING THE FRACTURED LANTERN WAS REMOVED TOGETHER OVER THE GUIDEWIRE. THE PROCEDURE WAS COMPLETED USING A NEW PX SLIM DELIVERY MICROCATHETER (PX SLIM) AND THE SAME DIAGNOSTIC CATHETER. THERE WAS NO REPORT OF AN ADVERSE EFFECT TO THE PATIENT.
Patient problems: No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions
MAUDE report 23796504 ↗
Other Penumbra, Inc. products
All Penumbra, Inc. devices →Sources and updates
- Models: FDA GUDID, file dated Oct 13, 2026. Models are grouped by the brand name the manufacturer registered.
- Adverse event reports: FDA MAUDE, file dated Oct 14, 2026
- Recalls: FDA Medical Device Recalls, file dated Oct 16, 2026
- Page last rebuilt: Oct 16, 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