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

MAUDE Adverse Event Report: ENDOLOGIX AFX; SUPRARENAL AORTIC EXTENSION

  • 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
 

ENDOLOGIX AFX; SUPRARENAL AORTIC EXTENSION Back to Search Results
Model Number A34-34/C80-O20
Device Problems Hole In Material (1293); Leak/Splash (1354); Material Integrity Problem (2978); Torn Material (3024)
Patient Problem Failure of Implant (1924)
Event Date 09/27/2017
Event Type  Injury  
Manufacturer Narrative
To date the incident sample has not been received for evaluation.If the sample is received or if additional information pertinent to the incident is obtained, a follow-up report will be submitted.
 
Event Description
On (b)(6) 2012, the patient was initially implanted with a bifurcated stent and a suprarenal extension.On (b)(6) 2017, a physician elected to explant the devices due to a type 3b endoleak, the graft material was torn.The patient was reported as doing fine post-secondary procedure.There have been no additional patient sequelae reported.
 
Manufacturer Narrative
The manufacturing lot evaluation confirmed all devices met specifications prior to release.The device was not returned therefore no evaluation was completed.At the completion of the clinical assessment, clinical was able to find substantial evidence to support the following reported events of endoleak type 3b of the cuff/extension and the device being explanted.Clinical also was able to find substantial evidence to support the following additional event of aneurysm enlargement and stent cage dilation of the cuff (stretched fabric 30%).Cumulative knowledge informed by past assessments of similar complaints was applied to a review of the available medical information.The most likely cause of the compromised stent graft integrity (stretched and breached fabric) was the use of strata material.The final, favorable patient disposition post explant and conversion could not be confirmed.A root cause investigation was carried out for all afx complaints having an identified failure mode of a type iiib endoleak.Endologix implemented the following corrective actions with the intent of reducing type iiib endoleak events; upgraded graft material (i.E.Duraply) and pdates to the ifu and additional physician training.The change to duraply graft material and the ifu changes were put in place july 2014.The type iiib endoleak rate for afx manufactured and implanted before these corrective actions were put in place is trending at 2.5%.Since the corrective actions were implemented, the type iiib endoleak events reported for afx devices has been reduced to <0.2%.Endologix continues to investigate this event and similar events to ensure the highest quality and patient safety.These types of events will be monitored and trended as part of the quality system.
 
Search Alerts/Recalls

  New Search  |  Submit an Adverse Event Report

Brand Name
AFX
Type of Device
SUPRARENAL AORTIC EXTENSION
Manufacturer (Section D)
ENDOLOGIX
2 musick
irvine CA 92618
Manufacturer Contact
victor arellano
2 musick
irvine, CA 92618
9495984671
MDR Report Key6941546
MDR Text Key89232773
Report Number2031527-2017-00522
Device Sequence Number1
Product Code MIH
Combination Product (y/n)N
Reporter Country CodeUS
PMA/PMN Number
P040002
Number of Events Reported1
Summary Report (Y/N)N
Report Source Manufacturer
Source Type company representative
Reporter Occupation Physician
Type of Report Initial,Followup
Report Date 09/27/2017
1 Device was Involved in the Event
1 Patient was Involved in the Event
Date FDA Received10/11/2017
Is this an Adverse Event Report? Yes
Is this a Product Problem Report? Yes
Device Operator Health Professional
Device Expiration Date12/31/2012
Device Model NumberA34-34/C80-O20
Device Lot Number1029111-009
Was Device Available for Evaluation? Yes
Is the Reporter a Health Professional? Yes
Was the Report Sent to FDA? No
Date Manufacturer Received09/27/2017
Was Device Evaluated by Manufacturer? Device Not Returned to Manufacturer
Date Device Manufactured01/26/2012
Is the Device Single Use? Yes
Is This a Reprocessed and Reused Single-Use Device? No
Type of Device Usage Initial
Patient Sequence Number1
Patient Outcome(s) Required Intervention;
Patient Age69 YR
-
-