(b)(4).Internal file number - (b)(4): during processing of this complaint, attempts were made to obtain complete event, patient and device information.The device is expected to be returned for evaluation.It has not yet been received.A follow up report will be submitted with all relevant information.
|
It was reported that the procedure was to treat a heavily tortuous, heavily calcified, and de novo lesion located in the proximal circumflex artery that was 95% stenosed.Pre-dilatation was performed with a 1.5 x 6 mm, 2.5 x 8 mm, and a 2.75 x 18 mm unspecified balloon catheters.A 2.75 x 48 mm xience xpedition stent could not cross the lesion due to the anatomy, and when the stent delivery system was removed, the shaft separated inside the patient.The separated portion was simply pulled out by the proximal part of the shaft.Another 2.75 x 48 mm xience xpediton was used, but failed to cross due to the anatomy.The procedure was successfully completed with a 2.75 x 18 mm and a 2.75 x 28 mm xience alpine stents.There was no clinically significant delay in the procedure and no adverse patient effects.No additional information was provided.
|
(b)(4).A visual and dimensional inspection were performed on the returned device.The reported shaft detachment was confirmed.The reported failure to advance could not be tested as it was based on operational circumstances.A review of the lot history record identified no manufacturing nonconformities issued to the reported lot that would have contributed to this event.Additionally, a review of the complaint history did not indicate a lot specific quality issue.The investigation determined the reported difficulties appear to be related to circumstances of the procedure.Based on the information reviewed and analysis of the returned device, there is no indication of a product quality issue with respect to the design, manufacture, or labeling of the device.
|