Catalog Number 1011711-38 |
Device Problems
Difficult To Position (1467); Device Damaged by Another Device (2915)
|
Patient Problem
No Consequences Or Impact To Patient (2199)
|
Event Date 06/29/2017 |
Event Type
malfunction
|
Manufacturer Narrative
|
(b)(4).During processing of this complaint, attempts were made to obtain complete event, patient and device information.The device is expected to be returned for evaluation.It has not yet been received.A follow up report will be submitted with all additional relevant information.The xience prime (2.5x38mm, 3.5x33mm) and xience alpine (2.5x38mm) referenced are being filed under separate medwatch reports.
|
|
Event Description
|
It was reported that the procedure was to treat a 90% stenosed, non-tortuous, and moderately calcified de novo lesion in the mid left main artery (lm), proximal circumflex (lcx), and proximal left anterior descending artery (lad).Following pre-dilatation, a 4.0x38mm xience prime stent was deployed from the lm to the lad.A 2.5x38mm xience prime stent delivery system (sds) was being advanced to deploy in the mid to distal lad; however, part of the stent became stuck in the deployed 4.0x38mm xience prime stent.The 2.5x38mm xience prime sds was pulled back, but the stent dislodged in the lm.A snare device was used to retrieve the 2.5x38mm xience prime stent; however, the 4.0x38mm xience prime stent also came out of the artery.While pulling back the 2.5x38mm xience prime a dissection occurred and the vessel occluded.The patient condition declined and cpr was started immediately; however, the patient experienced ventricular tachycardia and ventricular fibrillation.A 2.5x38mm xience alpine stent was deployed in the mid to distal lad and a 3.5x33mm xience prime stent was deployed in the lm to lad.Stent foreshortening was observed post dilatation for the 2.5x38mm xience alpine.Angiography was performed and thrombus formation was noted in the 3.5x33 xience prime stent.An attempt to deploy a 2.5x38mm xience xpedition stent in the lm to lcx was made; however, the sds could not cross.The patient expired.No additional information was provided.
|
|
Manufacturer Narrative
|
(b)(4).Evaluation summary: the device was returned for analysis.The reported device damaged by another device was confirmed.The reported difficulty to position was unable to be replicated in a testing environment as it was based on operational circumstances.A review of the lot history record identified no manufacturing nonconformities issued to the reported lot that would have contributed to this event.Additionally, a review of the complaint history identified no other similar incidents from this lot.The investigation determined the reported difficulties appear to be related to circumstances of the procedure as it is likely that as the 2.5x38mm xience prime was being advanced to deploy in the mid to distal lad (left anterior descending), part of the stent became stuck in the previously deployed 4.0x38mm xience prime stent resulting in the reported difficulty to position.The 2.5x38mm xience prime sds was pulled back, but the stent dislodged in the lm (left main).A snare device was used to retrieve the 2.5x38mm xience prime stent; however, the 4.0x38mm xience prime stent also came out of the artery; thus resulting in the reported device damaged by another device and the noted stent damages (stretched, mangled).There is no indication of a product quality issue with respect to manufacture, design or labeling.
|
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|
|