The patient successfully completed a trial and wear experience prior to the permanent device implant.The original implant location was in a location on the lower back with skin folds, which contributed to the patient dissatisfaction over time.Patient's physical anatomy appears to be a significant contributing factor in the dissatisfaction with the location of the device.Additionally, the patient spends a significant amount of time standing or walking, is experiencing increasing back issues, and is anticipating surgical intervention for those pre-existing conditions.A new ipg was placed in a slightly higher location the back with less tissue and flatter skin and the patient reports improved therapy after the revision.
|
The patient was implanted with the nalu spinal cord stimulator on (b)(6) 2023.Several months after being implanted, the patient expressed dissatisfaction with the location of the implantable pulse generator (ipg) due to discomfort and increasing communication issues between the ipg and the external therapy discs.Patient requested to have the ipg moved.Surgical revision took place on (b)(6) 2023.Initial plan was to move the existing device to the desired location, however during the procedure the ipg was damaged and required replacement.The existing leads remained in place and in use.The procedure took place on (b)(6) 2023, however the firm did not become aware of the event until (b)(6) 2023.
|