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

MAUDE Adverse Event Report: MEDTRONIC CARDIOVASCULAR ENDO ANCHOR SYSTEM - HELI-FX AAA; ENDOVASCULAR SUTURING SYSTEM

  • 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
 

MEDTRONIC CARDIOVASCULAR ENDO ANCHOR SYSTEM - HELI-FX AAA; ENDOVASCULAR SUTURING SYSTEM Back to Search Results
Model Number SA-85
Device Problem Break (1069)
Patient Problem No Consequences Or Impact To Patient (2199)
Event Date 10/12/2017
Event Type  malfunction  
Manufacturer Narrative
Film review summary review of a single returned non-contrast angiogram during implant revealed that 3 endoanchors had been implanted along the proximal/right wall of an endurant bifurcate.In addition, a partial (and likely fractured) section of an anchor was seen implanted along the left wall of the bifurcate.The fractured anchor was ~2 full turns in length, and the tail end of the fractured anchor was not seen in the films.The guide was positioned just above the broken anchor and was deflected ~90 deg toward the left-lateral wall of the bifurcate.No other obvious guide or stent graft issues were observed.A photograph of the tail end of the fractured anchor which had been removed from the patient was also returned; the anchor appeared to have fractured at the weld.The exact cause of the anchor fracture could not be determined from the single returned film and photograph.Other than the reported calcification, details of the anatomy at implant is unknown, and pre-implant ct¿s were not available for a comprehensive assessment of the patient¿s anatomy.In addition, complete images during implant, including films during the fracture event, were not available for review.It is possible that implanting into the reported calcified vessel may have contributed to the anchor fracture.
 
Event Description
A heli-fx was used as an accessory device for the endovascular treatment of a patient.However, it was reported that when the physician was deploying the third endoanchor in the proximal neck, the endoanchor fractured during the second phase of deployment.It was reported that, once the physician hit the button to deploy the second stage, the applier made a loud sound and the endoanchor looked as if it had straightened and then broke in half.It was reported that, the distal end of the endoanchor remained engaged through the graft and into the calcium with the proximal part of the endoanchor still in the applier.The physician retracted the applier back and could remove everything through the sheath with no issue reported.The physician reported that the cause of the fracture was, most likely due to calcium in the artery.No clinical sequelae were reported and the patient is fine.
 
Search Alerts/Recalls

  New Search  |  Submit an Adverse Event Report

Brand Name
ENDO ANCHOR SYSTEM - HELI-FX AAA
Type of Device
ENDOVASCULAR SUTURING SYSTEM
Manufacturer (Section D)
MEDTRONIC CARDIOVASCULAR
3576 unocal place
santa rosa CA 95403
Manufacturer (Section G)
MEDTRONIC CARDIOVASCULAR
3576 unocal place
santa rosa CA 95403
Manufacturer Contact
ibrahim ibrahim
3576 unocal place
santa rosa, CA 95403
7075917650
MDR Report Key6998775
MDR Text Key92046537
Report Number2953200-2017-01695
Device Sequence Number1
Product Code OTD
Combination Product (y/n)N
Reporter Country CodeUS
PMA/PMN Number
K140036
Number of Events Reported1
Summary Report (Y/N)N
Report Source Manufacturer
Source Type company representative,health
Reporter Occupation Physician
Type of Report Initial
Report Date 11/03/2017
1 Device was Involved in the Event
1 Patient was Involved in the Event
Date FDA Received11/03/2017
Is this an Adverse Event Report? No
Is this a Product Problem Report? Yes
Device Operator Health Professional
Device Model NumberSA-85
Device Catalogue NumberSA-85
Was Device Available for Evaluation? Device Returned to Manufacturer
Date Returned to Manufacturer10/16/2017
Is the Reporter a Health Professional? Yes
Date Manufacturer Received10/12/2017
Was Device Evaluated by Manufacturer? Yes
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 Age66 YR
-
-