A1: no patient specific details have been provided.Therefore, the patient initials reflect the w.L.Gore internal case number.E1: initial reporter name: (b)(6).H3: other code: the medical device is available, but was not returned for further investigation yet.H6 evaluation codes investigation findings c19 refers to the product history review: a review of the manufacturing records indicated the device met pre-release specifications.Further investigation is being conducted and will be included in the final report.Heparin surface incorporates carmeda heparin manufactured from heparin sodium api, which is covalently bound to the device surface and is essentially non-eluting.W.L.Gore & associates, inc.(gore) is submitting this report to comply with 21 c.F.R.Part 803, the medical device reporting regulation.This report is based upon information obtained by gore, which the company may not have been able to fully investigate or verify prior to the date the report was required by the fda.Blank fields present on this report include required fields and fields determined to be not applicable.Blank required fields indicate that the information was not provided, was deemed unavailable or was not applicable.This report does not constitute an admission or a conclusion by fda, gore, or its associates that the device, gore or its associates caused or contributed to the event described in the report.In particular, this report does not constitute a legal admission by anyone that the product described in this report has any defects or has malfunctioned, as defined from a legal standpoint.These words are included in the report and are fixed items for selection created by the fda, to categorize the type of event solely for the purpose of reporting pursuant to part 803.This statement should be included with any information or report disclosed to the public under the freedom of information act.
|
Engineering investigation: the engineering evaluation report details observations made directly on the returned device in addition to device photos captured during evaluation.The viabahn® device was returned to gore for evaluation, and deployment of the inner zipper had not been initiated.The evaluation has observed the deployment mechanism to be functional: the deployment line was not caught on any part of the device and deployment continued during evaluation.The cause for the reported deployment difficulty could not be established.Procedural deployment of the device can be impacted by different factors including but not limited to zipper integrity, delivery system support or stiffness, or presence of dried fluid on the device or within the catheter dual lumen.The investigation could not confirm the cause of the reported hazardous situation nor the primary device failure mode potentially associated with this event.The root cause of the reported failure mode of inability to deploy could not be established with the available information.The root cause of the observed exposed distal shaft and shifted endoprosthesis is consistent with device withdrawal or other manipulation during procedure.In the instruction for use for the gore® viabahn® endoprosthesis with propaten bioactive surface the following is stated: hazards and adverse events; device related: complications and adverse events can occur when using any endovascular device.These complications include, but are not limited to: deployment failure.
|