Visual analysis was performed on the returned device as well as review of the provided angiographic images.The stent was not received.The reported oversized stent length was unable to be confirmed.A ruler was used to measure the returned self expanding stent catheter length, the length was 80 cm; the stent length marker was measured, and it was 120 mm.The measurements obtained match the pouch/chipboard box label information.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 complaints reported from this lot.An abbott vascular medical affairs expert reviewed the details of the case and the angiographic images provided.The investigation was unable to confirm the reported oversized supera stent.Based on the returned device evaluation of the super stent system and review of the provided images, the assumption that an incorrect stent length of 150 mm cannot be confirmed by the user provided measurement.Initial review of this image show that the proximal portion of the measurement line starts proximal to the actual proximal stent edge at what is estimated to be at least 15 mm.Subtracting this assumed measurement error provides an estimated net length of 135 mm for the deployed stent.In addition, when reviewing the clear reduced diameter of the stent at the overlap junction the mechanical properties of the woven stent come into play.All things being equal, when a section of the supera stent is compressed below its nominal diameter, adjacent areas of the stent proximal and distal to that compression site compensate and increase the net length of the stent.Additionally, there are clear areas of additional elongation which compound any elongation created at the overlap and would require additional stacking beyond the amount needed to compensate for the overlap elongation.Taken in total the stent appears to be a 120 mm stent that was deployed with an initial elongation, as well as subsequent elongated portions that were not completely mitigated by sufficient stacking throughout the deployment length.Overall, there is no indication of a product quality issue with respect to the design, manufacture, or labeling of the device.B3: date of event.D6a: implant date.
|