Manufacturer's ref.No: (b)(4).Since no device has been received for analysis, no product investigation can be performed, and the customer complaint cannot be confirmed.Manufacturer record evaluation cannot be conducted because the no lot number was provided by the customer.If additional information is received regarding this event, a supplemental 3500a report will be submitted to the fda.Biosense webster manufacturer's report numbers: 2029046-2021-00564, 2029046-2021-00565, and 2029046-2021-00566 are related to the same incident.
|
This complaint is from a literature source.The following complications were reported in this publication: it was reported that 1 patient underwent catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation and suffered pseudo aneurysm.Intervention was not reported.(thermocool smarttouch).Model and catalog number are not available, but the suspected device is thermocool smarttouch.Other biosense webster devices that were also used in this study: carto 3 non-biosense webster devices that were also used in this study: ensite, al cath flux blue, blazer open-irrigated, flexability,tacticath.Publication details: title: similar outcomes with manual contact force ablation catheters and traditional catheters in the treatment of outflow tract premature ventricular complexes.Objective: unlike in atrial fibrillation ablation, there is a lack of appropriately sized and properly designed studies regarding outflow tract (ot) premature ventricular complex (pvc) ablation outcomes with contact force sensing (cfs) catheters.We aimed to compare the acute success, complication-, and long-term recurrence rates of manual cfs catheters with traditional irrigated catheters (t) in ot pvc ablation.Methods: single-centre, propensity-matched data of 75¿75 patients ablated for right-sided ot (rvot) or left-sided ot (lvot) pvcs in 2015¿17 with cfs or t catheters were compared.Acute success rate, peri-procedural complications, post-procedural daily pvc burden, and long-term recurrence rates were compared on intention-to-treat basis.
|