After placement of the stent on (b)(6) 2015, the stent caused major bladder pain and spasms in patient.Bleeding was also noted (unknown type/location per reporter).Stent will be removed and replaced with a competitor's device.Additional information has been requested, but not provided at the time of this report.
|
(b)(4).Investigation - evaluation.A review of complaint history, device record history, instructions for use (ifu), manufacturing instructions, documentation, drawing and trends was conducted during the investigation.The complaint device was not returned therefore, no physical examinations could be performed; however, a document based investigation evaluation was performed.There is no evidence to suggest the product was not made to specifications.Review of device history record shows no nonconforming events which could contribute to this failure mode.The device is shipped with an instruction for use (ifu) that describes the suggested instructions for endoscopic stent placement as well as caution¿s, specific items are addressed such as: ¿using a baseline pyelogram, estimate the proper stent length; add 1 cm to that estimated ureteral measurement.Accurate measurement enhances drainage efficiency and patient comfort¿if necessary, final adjustment can be made with endoscopic forceps.¿ a caution for this device is ¿individual variations of interaction between stents and the urinary system are unpredictable.Periodic evaluation via cystoscopic, radiographic, or ultrasonic means is suggested.¿ based on the information provided and the results of our investigation we are unable to determine with certainty the root cause of the reported difficulty.The appropriate internal personnel have been notified and we will continue to monitor for similar complaints.Per the risk assessment (ra) no further action is required.
|