It was reported during device implantation that the device could not detect heart rate.A pre-operative assessment to evaluate whether the patient was a good candidate for tachycardia detection was not performed.All sensitivity settings were used to try to verify the heartbeat, diagnostics were normal, and the battery of the programming wand being used was confirmed to be functioning.The wand was reportedly held still during verification and was reportedly communicating well with the generator.Additionally, the patient's generator was reported to be implanted close to the heart in the left chest.Throughout the surgery the patient's heart-rate was 60-62 bpm.The surgeon did not want to try moving the generator to a different location to test if this solved the issue.A review of the device history records confirmed that the suspect device passed all quality inspections prior to release internal data was reviewed.It was determined that the device was turned on prior to heartbeat verification and could have been stimulating during verification, which could cause have caused interference.Only one interrogation was taken after heartbeat detection was turned on.It captured a foreground heart-rate of 60, which is the default value shown during interrogations when the device is not sensing a heart-rate.Therefore, it was likely that a valid heart rate had not yet been detected.No further relevant information has been received to date.No known surgical intervention has occurred to date.
|