• Decrease font size
  • Return font size to normal
  • Increase font size
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services

MAUDE Adverse Event Report: COOK IRELAND LTD ZILVER PTX 35 DRUG-ELUTING STENT; NIU STENT, SUPERFICIAL FEMORAL ARTERY, DRUG-ELUTING

  • Print
  • Share
  • E-mail
-
Super Search Devices@FDA
510(k) | DeNovo | Registration & Listing | Adverse Events | Recalls | PMA | HDE | Classification | Standards
CFR Title 21 | Radiation-Emitting Products | X-Ray Assembler | Medsun Reports | CLIA | TPLC
 

COOK IRELAND LTD ZILVER PTX 35 DRUG-ELUTING STENT; NIU STENT, SUPERFICIAL FEMORAL ARTERY, DRUG-ELUTING Back to Search Results
Model Number G38483
Device Problem Off-Label Use (1494)
Patient Problems Muscle Spasm(s) (1966); Vasoconstriction (2126); Cramp(s) /Muscle Spasm(s) (4521)
Event Date 10/19/2020
Event Type  malfunction  
Manufacturer Narrative
Pma/510(k) #p100022/s026.Investigation is still pending.A follow up mdr will be submitted to include the investigation conclusions.
 
Event Description
They were doing a retrograde access of the anterior tibial artery.They put it up to the tibial and the vessel spasmed and it got stuck.User gave nitro, waited a few minutes and then pulled it out.Device was not deployed.User aborted the procedure do to other unrelated issues.Did any unintended section of the device remain inside the patient¿s body? no.If yes, please describe.Was the patient hospitalized or was there prolonged hospitalization due to this occurrence? no.If yes, please describe.Did the patient require any additional procedures due to this occurrence? no.If yes, please describe.Did the product cause or contribute to the need for additional procedures? no.If yes, please specify additional procedures and provide details.Has the complainant reported any adverse effects on the patient due to this occurrence? no.Has the complainant reported that the product caused or contributed to the adverse effects? no.Please specify adverse effects and provide details.Where was the access site? anterior tibial.What was the patient¿s anatomy? i.E.Scarred, tortuous, calcified, etc.Asku.What was the target location for the stent? distal sfa.Was the target location severely calcified or tortuous? asku.Was the device flushed prior to use? dm believes so.Were there any difficulties deploying the stent? yes.Was the stent fully deployed before removing the delivery system from the patient? no.What other devices were used in the procedure? 035 rosen wire, 5/6 slender sheath (terumo).Please provide manufacturer, model, brand, and size if possible.Were any additional procedures necessary as a result of this event? no.Can any photos, images, or reports of the procedure or device be provided? no.Please review following ¿failure¿ modes with contact to determine if additional questions apply.Unknown.If the event involving deployment difficulties, request the following: was the stent eventually deployed? no.Was pre-dilatation conducted before stent deployment? asku.Was the handle pulled toward the hub while the delivery system remained stationary during deployment? n/a didn't get that far.If the event that involve device stuck on wire guide, difficult to advance / remove delivery system and/or wire guide, request the following: was the wire guide hydrophilic or non-hydrophilic? non.How long was the procedure from advancing delivery system to the moment when the user attempted to remove the device? unkonwn but dm believes 1 1/2-2 hours.Was the wire guide new or was the wire guide used previously before advancing the zilver delivery system? probably previously used within the patient.If used, was the wire guide wiped between uses? dm believes so.
 
Event Description
Supplemental report being submitted due to lab evaluation on (b)(6) 2021.They were doing a retrograde access of the anterior tibial artery.They put it up to the tibial and the vessel spasmed and it got stuck.User gave nitro, waited a few minutes and then pulled it out.Device was not deployed.User aborted the procedure do to other unrelated issues.Did any unintended section of the device remain inside the patient¿s body? no.If yes, please describe.2.Was the patient hospitalized or was there prolonged hospitalization due to this occurrence? no.If yes, please describe.3.Did the patient require any additional procedures due to this occurrence? no.If yes, please describe.4.Did the product cause or contribute to the need for additional procedures? no.If yes, please specify additional procedures and provide details.5.Has the complainant reported any adverse effects on the patient due to this occurrence? no.6.Has the complainant reported that the product caused or contributed to the adverse effects? no.Please specify adverse effects and provide details.2 where was the access site? anterior tibial.1.3 what was the patient¿s anatomy? i.E.Scarred, tortuous, calcified, etc.Asku.1.4 what was the target location for the stent? distal sfa.¿was the target location severely calcified or tortuous? asku.1.5 was the device flushed prior to use? dm believes so.1.6 were there any difficulties deploying the stent? yes.1.7 was the stent fully deployed before removing the delivery system from the patient? no.1.8 what other devices were used in the procedure? 035 rosen wire, 5/6 slender sheath (terumo).Please provide manufacturer, model, brand, and size if possible.1.9 were any additional procedures necessary as a result of this event? no.1.10 can any photos, images, or reports of the procedure or device be provided? no.2.0 please review following ¿failure¿ modes with contact to determine if additional questions apply.Unknown.2.5 if the event involving deployment difficulties, request the following: 2.5.1 was the stent eventually deployed? no.2.5.2 was pre-dilatation conducted before stent deployment? asku.2.5.3 was the handle pulled toward the hub while the delivery system remained stationary during deployment? n/a didn't get that far.2.6 if the event that involve device stuck on wire guide, difficult to advance / remove delivery system and/or wire guide, request the following: 2.6.1 was the wire guide hydrophilic or non-hydrophilic? non.2.6.2 how long was the procedure from advancing delivery system to the moment when the user attempted to remove the device? unkonwn but dm believes 1 1/2-2 hours.2.6.3 was the wire guide new or was the wire guide used previously before advancing the zilver delivery system? probably previously used within the patient.2.6.3.1 if used, was the wire guide wiped between uses? dm believes so.
 
Manufacturer Narrative
Pma/510(k) #: p100022/s001.Annex g: g04122 - stent.Investigation is still pending, a follow up mdr will be submitted to include the investigation conclusions.
 
Manufacturer Narrative
Pma/510(k) #: p100022/s001.Device evaluation: the zisv6-35-125-6-140-ptx device of lot number c1757121 involved in this complaint was not available for evaluation.The empty tyvek pouch was returned with no device.With the information provided, a document-based investigation was conducted.Lab evaluation: an empty tyvek pouch was returned so no device evaluation took place.Document review: prior to distribution zisv6-35-125-6-140-ptx devices are subjected to a visual inspection and functional checks to ensure device integrity.These inspections and functional checks are outlined in internal procedures in place at cirl.A review of the manufacturing records for zisv6-35-125-6-140-ptx of lot number c1757121 did not reveal any discrepancies that could have contributed to this complaint issue.The review of relevant manufacturing records confirms the failure mode has not previously occurred with the current lot number.Based on the information available to date, there is no evidence to suggest that there are any manufacturing issues associated with lot number c1757121.It should be noted that the instructions for use (ifu0118-6) states the following: ''to avoid involvement of the below-the- knee popliteal artery, the most distal end of the stent should be placed above the plane of the femoral epicondyles.'' there is evidence to suggest the user did not follow the ifu.As per the description the user attempted to access the sfa via the tibial artery using a retrograde approach.Root cause review: a definitive root cause of off label use was identified from the available information.From the available information it is known that the access site was the anterior tibial.Summary: the complaint is confirmed based on customer testimony.According to the initial reporter, the patient did not experience any adverse effects due to this occurrence.Complaints of this nature will continue to be monitored for potential emerging trends.
 
Event Description
Final mdr being submitted due to completion of the investigation on 24-sept-21.
 
Search Alerts/Recalls

  New Search  |  Submit an Adverse Event Report

Brand Name
ZILVER PTX 35 DRUG-ELUTING STENT
Type of Device
NIU STENT, SUPERFICIAL FEMORAL ARTERY, DRUG-ELUTING
Manufacturer (Section D)
COOK IRELAND LTD
o halloran road
limerick
MDR Report Key10849869
MDR Text Key254789702
Report Number3001845648-2020-00871
Device Sequence Number1
Product Code NIU
UDI-Device Identifier10827002384832
UDI-Public(01)10827002384832(17)220806(10)C1757121
Combination Product (y/n)Y
PMA/PMN Number
P100022
Number of Events Reported1
Summary Report (Y/N)N
Report Source Manufacturer
Source Type company representative,consum
Type of Report Initial,Followup,Followup
Report Date 09/24/2021
1 Device was Involved in the Event
1 Patient was Involved in the Event
Date FDA Received11/17/2020
Is this an Adverse Event Report? No
Is this a Product Problem Report? Yes
Device Operator Health Professional
Device Expiration Date08/06/2022
Device Model NumberG38483
Device Catalogue NumberZISV6-35-125-6-140-PTX
Device Lot NumberC1757121
Was Device Available for Evaluation? No
Was the Report Sent to FDA? No
Distributor Facility Aware Date10/19/2020
Event Location Hospital
Date Manufacturer Received10/20/2020
Is This a Reprocessed and Reused Single-Use Device? No
Patient Sequence Number1
-
-