It was reported that the procedure was to treat a lesion in the heavily calcified, narrow popliteal artery.A 4 x 100 mm supera veritas stent delivery system (sds) was selected for the procedure.The sds was advance to the lesion and significant resistance was felt during the first 2 to 3 advancements and retractions of the thumb slide and the stent implant elongated.The physician then continued deployment of the stent implant with no further resistance.The sds was removed from the anatomy and during the final angiography it was observed that the tip of the sds was in the stent implant.Several unsuccessful attempts were made to retrieve the sds tip which took 90 minutes.As there was flow in the peroneal artery, the decision was made to leave the sds tip in the anatomy.No other information was provided.
|
(b)(4).Evaluation summary: the reported deployment issue was unable to be confirmed as the stent had already been fully deployed.The tip separation was confirmed.In this case, it is likely that the distal sheath was bent or entrapped within the vessel causing the noted resistance during deployment.Additionally, withdrawing the delivery system with a partially deployed stent may cause the tip to detach when the withdrawal forces of pulling the partially deployed stent through the restricted area of the introducer sheath exceeds the tensile strength of the tip lumen.It should be noted that the supera instruction for use states: following confirmed implantation of the supera stent, retract the thumb slide in a single motion to the starting position on the handle and rotate the system lock and deployment lock into the locked position, in line with the thumb slide.Additionally, the ifu states: precaution: should unusual resistance be felt at any time during stent deployment, the entire system should be removed together with the introducer sheath or guiding catheter as a single unit.A review of the lot history record revealed no manufacturing nonconformities that would have contributed to this complaint.Additionally, a review of the complaint history of the reported lot revealed no other incidents.The investigation determined that the reported difficulties was due to case circumstances.There is no indication of a product quality issue with respect to the design, manufacture, or labeling of the device.
|