BOSTON SCIENTIFIC CORPORATION SOLYX SIS SYSTEM; MESH, SURGICAL, SYNTHETIC, UROGYNECOLOGIC, FOR STRESS URINARY INCONTINENCE, FEMA
|
Back to Search Results |
|
Model Number M0068507010 |
Device Problems
Difficult to Advance (2920); Material Deformation (2976)
|
Patient Problem
Perforation (2001)
|
Event Date 10/16/2020 |
Event Type
Injury
|
Manufacturer Narrative
|
(b)(4).The device has not been received for analysis.Upon receipt and completion of the failure analysis of the complaint device, if there is any further relevant information from that review, a supplemental medwatch will be filed.
|
|
Event Description
|
It was reported to boston scientific corporation that a solyx sis system device was used during a solyx sling procedure performed on (b)(6) 2020.According to the complainant, during the procedure, there was a difficulty passing the device through the tissue and the sling went more into the bladder.The mesh also became stretched with trying to adjust as it did not fit as intended.The procedure was completed with another solyx sis system device.The condition of the patient after the procedure was reportedly good.
|
|
Event Description
|
It was reported to boston scientific corporation that a solyx sis system device was used during a solyx sling procedure performed on (b)(6) 2020.According to the complainant, during the procedure, there was a difficulty passing the device through the tissue and the sling went more into the bladder.The mesh also became stretched with trying to adjust as it did not fit as intended.The procedure was completed with another solyx sis system device.The condition of the patient after the procedure was reportedly good.
|
|
Manufacturer Narrative
|
Block h6: patient code 2001 captures the reportable event of bladder perforation.Block h10: one single incision mesh was returned.A visual examination of the returned mesh revealed that it was stretched on both sides.Both mesh carriers were present and contained procedural residue.A review of the device history record (dhr) confirmed that the device met all material, assembly, and product specifications at the time of release to distribution.Based on the reported information, the user experienced difficulty passing the device through the tissue.This was observed from the stretched mesh during product return analysis.Therefore, the investigation concluded that the most probable cause for this complaint is adverse event related to procedure, which indicates that the adverse event occurred during the procedure and the device had no influence on the event.The adverse event of bladder perforation is accounted for in the risk documentation and labeling, and is an anticipated adverse outcome associated with normal use of the device.The perforation is a known inherent risk of the device.A labeling review was performed and, from the information available, this device was used per the directions for use (dfu) / product label.
|
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|
|
|