Please note that device reported is an trapease vena cava filter and for which the catalog and lot numbers are not currently available.If obtained, a follow up report will be submitted within 30 days upon receipt.As reported in the legal brief becker vs.Cordis, after an unknown period of time when a trapease vena cava filter was implanted, the filter subsequently malfunctioned and caused injury and damages to plaintiff including, but not limited to, blood clots, clotting and occlusion of ivc filter.As a direct and proximate result of these malfunctions, plaintiff suffered life-threatening injuries and damages, and required extensive medical care and treatment.The product was not returned for analysis.A review of the manufacturing records could not be conducted without a lot number.The trapease filter is indicated for use in the prevention of recurrent pulmonary embolism (pe) via percutaneous placement in the vena cava for patients in which anticoagulants are contraindicated, anticoagulant therapy for thromboembolic disease has failed, emergency treatment following massive pulmonary embolism where anticipated benefits of conventional therapy are reduced or for chronic, recurrent pulmonary embolism where anticoagulant therapy has failed, or is contraindicated.The purpose of a vena cava filter is to catch thrombus from the lower extremities as it travels along normal blood flow patterns up towards the heart.Vena cava thrombus in the filter does not represent a device malfunction.The reported vena cava thrombosis could not be confirmed without films for review.Factors that may have influenced the event include patient, pharmacological and lesion characteristics.Given the limited information available for review at this time, there is nothing to suggest that the reported event is related to the design and manufacturing process of the device; therefore no corrective action will be taken.Should additional information become available, the file will be updated accordingly.
|
As reported in the legal brief becker vs.Cordis, after an unknown period of time when a trapease vena cava filter was implanted, the filter subsequently malfunctioned and caused injury and damages to plaintiff including, but not limited to, blood clots, clotting and occlusion of ivc filter.As a direct and proximate result of these malfunctions, plaintiff suffered life-threatening injuries and damages, and required extensive medical care and treatment.
|