MAUDE Adverse Event Report: CORDIS CASHEL UNKNOWN TRAPEASE FILTER; CATHETER, INTRAVASCULAR, DIAGNOSTIC

Catalog Number 466P306X

Device Problem Failure to Align (2522)

Patient Problems Perforation (2001); Perforation of Vessels (2135)

Event Date 11/21/2017

Event Type  Injury  

Manufacturer Narrative

As reported, the patient underwent placement of a trapease inferior vena cava (ivc) filter.The indication for filter placement is not available.The filter subsequently malfunctioned and caused injury and damage to the patient, including but not limited to perforation and tilt.The filter remains implanted; thus, unavailable for analysis.The product was not returned for analysis and the sterile lot number has not been provided; therefore, no device analysis nor device history record review could be performed.The trapease vena cava filter is indicated for use in the prevention of recurrent pulmonary embolism (pe) via percutaneous placement in the vena cava for patients in which anticoagulants are contraindicated, anticoagulant therapy for thromboembolic disease has failed, emergency treatment following massive pulmonary embolism where anticipated benefits of conventional therapy are reduced or for chronic, recurrent pulmonary embolism where anticoagulant therapy has failed, or is contraindicated.The purpose of a vena cava filter is to catch thrombus from the lower extremities as it travels along normal blood flow patterns up towards the heart.Without procedural films for review, the filter tilt reported could not be confirmed.Additionally, the timing and mechanism of the filter tilt is unknown.Ivc filter tilt has been associated with the anatomy of the vessel, specifically asymmetry and tortuousness.It was reported that there was perforation of the ivc; however, a clinical conclusion could not be determined as to the cause of the event.A review of the instructions for use notes vessel damage such as intimal tears and perforation as procedural complications related it ivc filters.Ivc perforation from removable filters is relatively common, and directly related to how long the filter has been in place.Studies have noted a greater than 80% perforation rate overall, with all filters imaged after 71 days from implantation revealing some level of perforation.Clinical factors that may have influenced the event include patient, pharmacological and lesion characteristics.Without procedural films or images for review the reported event(s) could not be confirmed.Given the limited information available for review at this time, there is nothing to suggest that the reported events are related to the design and manufacturing process of the device; therefore, no corrective action will be taken.Should additional information become available, the file will be updated accordingly.

Event Description

As reported by the legal brief, the patient underwent placement of a trapease vena cava filter.The filter subsequently malfunctioned and caused injury and damage to the patient, including but not limited to perforation and tilt.As a direct and proximate result of these malfunctions, the patient suffered life-threatening injuries and damages, and required extensive medical care and treatment.As a further proximate result, the patient has suffered and will continue to suffer significant medical expenses, pain and suffering, and other damages.

Manufacturer Narrative

Complaint conclusion: as reported, the patient underwent placement of a trapease vena cava filter.The indication for the filter implantation was reported to be a pulmonary embolism (pe).The filter was implanted via the right common femoral vein and deployed with its¿ superior aspect at the level of l3.Approximately five years and nine months after the implantation, the patient became aware that the filter had tilted and was associated with perforation of the filter strut(s) outside the inferior vena cava (ivc).The patient further reported having experienced anxiety.The patient further reported experiencing fear and anxiety associated with the filter.The product was not returned for analysis and the sterile lot number has not been provided; therefore, no device analysis nor device history record review could be performed.The trapease vena cava filter is indicated for use in the prevention of recurrent pulmonary embolism (pe) via percutaneous placement in the inferior vena cava (ivc) for patients in which anticoagulants are contraindicated, anticoagulant therapy for thromboembolic disease has failed, emergency treatment following massive pe where anticipated benefits of conventional therapy are reduced or for chronic, recurrent pe where anticoagulant therapy has failed, or is contraindicated.The purpose of a vena cava filter is to catch thrombus from the lower extremities as it travels along normal blood flow patterns up towards the heart.Without images or procedural films for review, the reported filter tilt and ivc perforation events could not be confirmed and the exact cause could not be determined.Ivc filter tilt has been associated with the anatomy of the vessel, specifically asymmetry and tortuousness.Additionally, the timing and mechanism of the filter tilt is unknown.It is unknown if the tilt contributed to the reported perforation.A review of the instructions for use (ifu) notes vessel damage such as intimal tears and perforation as procedural complications related to ivc filters.Studies have noted a greater than 80% perforation rate overall, with all filters imaged after 71 days from implantation revealing some level of perforation.Clinical factors that may have influenced the event include the patient¿s pre-existing co-morbidities, pharmacological issues and lesion characteristics.The anxiety experienced by the patient does not represent a device malfunction.Anxiety, part of the body¿s natural response to stress and can cause feelings of, but not limited to, nervousness, unease and worry.Given the limited information available for review, there is nothing to suggest that a malfunction in the design and manufacturing process of the device; therefore, no corrective action will be taken.Should additional information become available, the file will be updated accordingly.

Event Description

As reported by the legal brief, the patient underwent placement of a trapease vena cava filter.The filter subsequently malfunctioned and caused injury and damage to the patient, including but not limited to perforation and tilt.As a direct and proximate result of these malfunctions, the patient suffered life-threatening injuries and damages, and required extensive medical care and treatment.As a further proximate result, the patient has suffered and will continue to suffer significant medical expenses, pain and suffering, and other damages.The following additional information was received per the patient¿s implant record: the filter was implanted due to pulmonary embolism.The filter was deployed via the right common femoral vein and placed with the tip at the superior endplate of l3.An inferior vena cavagram demonstrated successful deployment of the ivc filter.No complications were identified.According to the information received in the patient profile form (ppf), patient became aware of the reported events approximately five years and nine months post implantation.The patient reports perforation of filter strut(s) outside the ivc and tilt.The patient also reports suffering from anxiety.

• Brand Name: UNKNOWN TRAPEASE FILTER
• Type of Device: CATHETER, INTRAVASCULAR, DIAGNOSTIC
• Manufacturer (Section D): CORDIS CASHEL; cahir road; cashel, co. tipperary; EI
• MDR Report Key: 8605489
• MDR Text Key: 144878463
• Report Number: 1016427-2019-02812
• Device Sequence Number: 1
• Product Code: DQO
• Combination Product (y/n): N
• PMA/PMN Number: K020316
• Number of Events Reported: 1
• Summary Report (Y/N): N
• Report Source: Manufacturer
• Source Type: company representative,other
• Type of Report: Initial,Followup
• Report Date: 06/06/2019

1 Device was Involved in the Event

1 Patient was Involved in the Event

• Date FDA Received: 05/13/2019
• Is this an Adverse Event Report?: Yes
• Is this a Product Problem Report?: Yes
• Device Operator: Health Professional
• Device Catalogue Number: 466P306X
• Was Device Available for Evaluation?: No
• Date Manufacturer Received: 05/17/2019
• Is This a Reprocessed and Reused Single-Use Device?: No
• Patient Sequence Number: 1
• Patient Outcome(s): Hospitalization; Life Threatening; Required Intervention; Disability
• Patient Age: 81 YR