Model Number 37800 |
Device Problems
High impedance (1291); Inappropriate/Inadequate Shock/Stimulation (1574); Impedance Problem (2950)
|
Patient Problems
Nausea (1970); Vomiting (2144); Therapeutic Response, Decreased (2271); Electric Shock (2554)
|
Event Date 02/03/2016 |
Event Type
Injury
|
Manufacturer Narrative
|
The main component of the system and other applicable components are: product id: 4351-35, serial# (b)(4), implanted: (b)(6) 2015, product type: lead.Product id: 4351-35, serial# (b)(4), implanted: (b)(6) 2015, product type: lead.Analysis results were not available at the time of this report.A follow-up report will be sent when analysis is completed.
|
|
Event Description
|
The health care provider (hcp) via a manufacturer representative reported that the patient had a return of symptoms of nausea and vomiting.The patient was better versus baseline, but the hcp was concerned with the patient's increasing impedance levels and increase in symptoms.At implant impedance was 420 ohms, the patient was seen on (b)(6) 2016 for recurring nausea and vomiting and their impedance readings were 550 ohms, and on (b)(6) 2016 it was over 900 ohms.At that appointment 2 and case was at 380 ohms, case and 3 was at 784 ohms, and 2 and 3 were at over 900 ohms.The hcp was planning on getting an anteroposterior (ap) x-ray as well as doing an endoscopy to check for lead migration.The hcp was thinking of trying to turn off lead 3 to see how the patient responded.The hcp tried to turn off lead 3 and just use lead 2 and the patient got a shocking sensation when they did that, so they returned back to their previous settings.The hcp was going to scope the patient on (b)(6) 2016 and then determine whether or not to replace 1 lead, both leads, or the whole system including the battery.Before the patient's surgery on (b)(6) 2016, the hcp got an impedance of 560 ohms, which they thought was very odd considering it had been running much higher.The hcp went ahead and replaced the battery and would be sending the old battery back to the manufacturer for review.The patient's impedance was 470 on (b)(6) 2016 and the patient was feeling great after the battery replacement.There was no patient death and the patient recovered without sequelae.The indications for use for this patient were gastric stimulation and gastrointestinal/pelvic floor.
|
|
Event Description
|
Additional information received from the health care provider (hcp) reported that the cause of the increase in symptoms and impedances was not determined.The battery was changed and the impedances returned to normal and the patient's symptoms improved.The troubleshooting related to the increase in symptoms and impedances was multiple interrogations of the system.The hcp did an esophagogastroduodenoscopy (egd) to rule out erosion of the lead into the stomach lumen.
|
|
Manufacturer Narrative
|
Analysis of the ins (b)(4) found no anomaly.The ins passed functional testing.Normal impedance was measured when tested in saline.The impedance measurement function was also checked at body temperature with fixed 500 ohm resistors connected between the #2, #3 and case electrodes through an extension.The impedance was measured using a clinician programmer after warming 4 hours in a body temperature oven, then 4 days later, and finally 7 days later.The impedance did not change more than 3 ohms in the seven days.No issues were found with the ins impedance measurement function.
|
|
Manufacturer Narrative
|
If information is provided in the future, a supplemental report will be issued.
|
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|
|