Model Number LXMC13 |
Device Problem
Migration or Expulsion of Device (1395)
|
Patient Problem
No Code Available (3191)
|
Event Type
Injury
|
Manufacturer Narrative
|
(b)(4).Date sent: 06/12/2020.Event date: unknown.Abdominal x-ray reviewed by ethicon medical: the image appeared to be a supine abdominal x-ray.There was an obvious discontinuous linx device seen in the epigastric area.The annular shape was absent, and the appearance was c-shape consistent with a discontinuous device.The anatomical location appears consistent with a device placed in the correct position at the cardia.Additional information received: on what date was the device explanted? explanted on (b)(6) 2020.Did the patient have an autoimmune disease? no.Is the patient currently taking steroids / immunization drugs? no.On what date was the linx device implanted? unknown.Were there any intra-operative complications during implant? no.Was there any hiatal or crural repair done at the same time as the implant? yes.Was the device found in the correct position/geometry at the time of removal? no.The device was discontinuous.Was a new linx placed after this one was removed? no.What is the current patient status? unknown.Attempts are being made to obtain the following information.To date no response has been provided.If further details are received at a later date a supplemental medwatch will be sent.Did the patient undergo an mri since device implant? if so, when was the mri and what strength? did the patient have any other surgeries in the area? was any additional imaging performed since device implant?.
|
|
Event Description
|
It was reported that the ¿linx device lxmc13 will be explanted (date unknown).Patient had chest x-ray for no- related complaint.X ray showed discontinuous linx.Patient has no gerd related symptoms.
|
|
Manufacturer Narrative
|
(b)(4).Date sent: 07/13/2020.The dhr for lot 19538 was reviewed.No ncs, defects, or reworks related to the product complaint were found.
|
|
Manufacturer Narrative
|
(b)(4).Date sent: 9/16/2020.Device analysis: the visual analysis found that the returned device had an exposed well ball paired with the male bead of the adjacent bead.The affected male bead case through hole diameter was measured with computed tomography (ct) and found to be greater than the specification.A slight rim was noted on the outer edge of the through-hole.No conclusions could be made whether the cause of the rim is supplier-related (machining process) or user-related.However, since this outer rim is only present on the outer surface of the male bead case and doesn't extend to the smallest diameter of the through-hole, it is not thought to have contributed to the weld ball pull through.The exposed weld ball diameter was found to meet specifications.The interference between the male bead case through hole and the exposed weld ball diameters was 0.0004".These measurements were confirmed during the ct analysis.The ct analysis of the inner structure of the beads at the disconnected junction did not find any evidence of part deformation that could have contributed to the failure.It is presumed that a certain geometric combination of the weld ball and the washer through-hole resulted in the device separation in vivo.The link length and tensile force were found to meet the applicable specifications.The remaining device characteristics, excepting the visible weld ball, show no anomalies for a device that has been reasonably changed as part of the explant procedure.
|
|
Manufacturer Narrative
|
(b)(4).Date sent: 08/28/2020.
|
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|