The patient's neurostimulator was initially placed on (b)(6) 2018.The patient was seen by the treating center on (b)(6) 2020, and the battery voltage of the device was measured at 2.81v.On (b)(6) 2020 neuropace became aware that the battery had reached eos (voltage was measured at 1.64v).The patient denied any medical procedures during the timeframe (b)(6) through (b)(6) which may have contributed to the rapid drop in device voltage.Initial troubleshooting was performed by neuropace on available device data, and this event was preliminarily identified as a premature battery depletion.The patient underwent a device replacement without complication on (b)(6) 2020.Pending return of the explanted product to neuropace for investigation.
|
(b)(4).The explanted device was returned to neuropace and underwent investigation.Upon receipt, the device was found to be damaged, with a significant dent noted in the device body.Neuropace followed-up with the treating center and was unable to obtain any additional information regarding when the damage to the device may have occurred.Investigation of the device included review of device sessions, bench top testing, and opening of the device and performing detailed analysis of the neurostimulator.Electrical testing, thermal imaging and 3d x-ray and electron microscopy of the device's components were also performed.The investigation found that copper migration between layers of the printed circuit board created a resistive short circuit.This copper migration was most probably facilitated by a crack found in the board at the site of the failure.This crack was caused by mechanical damage to the neurostimulator.
|