(b)(4).It is indicated that the device is not returning for evaluation; therefore, a failure analysis of the complaint device could not be completed.A review of the lot history record revealed no non-conformances that would have contributed to the reported event.The results of the query of similar incidents in the complaint handling database for this lot did not indicate a manufacturing issue.The reported patient effect of restenosis is a known observed and potential adverse event as listed in the instructions for use (ifu).Based on the reviewed information, no product deficiency was identified.
|
It was reported that on (b)(6) 2012, during a heavily calcified right internal carotid artery (ica) stenting procedure, there was some difficulty with the advancement of the acculink stent delivery system (sds) times two attempts.An xact sds was advanced and would not cross the lesion due to the patients anatomy.Another non-study stent would not cross.Then the same acculink sds was advanced again and was successfully implanted to treat the lesion.On (b)(6) 2013, increased velocities were noted in the right ica and per angiogram, 80% in-stent restenosis was noted.On (b)(6) 2013, the patient was hospitalized for lesion revascularization.An xact stent was implanted.On (b)(6) 2013, the event was noted to be resolved and the patient was discharged home.There was no additional information provided.
|