(b)(4).During processing of this complaint, attempts were made to obtain complete event, patient and device information.The device was returned for analysis.The reported shaft separation was confirmed.The reported shaft tear was unable to be confirmed.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.There is no indication of a product quality issue with respect to manufacture, design or labeling.
|
It was reported that the procedure was to treat a heavily tortuous, heavily calcified lesion in the distal marginal coronary artery.Pre-dilatation was performed on the lesion with 2.0 and 2.5mm unspecified balloons.Then a 2.25 x 18mm xience alpine was attempted to be advanced several times but failed to cross due to the anatomy; when the proximal shaft broke.The device was simply removed.Once outside of the anatomy, a tear on the shaft was also noted.The patient was treated with balloon angioplasty.There was no clinically significant delay in the procedure and no adverse patient effects.No additional information was provided.
|