• Decrease font size
  • Return font size to normal
  • Increase font size
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services

MAUDE Adverse Event Report: TORAX MEDICAL, INC. LINX 1.5T 14 BEAD OUS; ANTI-REFLUX IMPLANT

  • Print
  • Share
  • E-mail
-
Super Search Devices@FDA
510(k) | DeNovo | Registration & Listing | Adverse Events | Recalls | PMA | HDE | Classification | Standards
CFR Title 21 | Radiation-Emitting Products | X-Ray Assembler | Medsun Reports | CLIA | TPLC
 

TORAX MEDICAL, INC. LINX 1.5T 14 BEAD OUS; ANTI-REFLUX IMPLANT Back to Search Results
Catalog Number LXM14
Device Problems Device Appears to Trigger Rejection (1524); Patient Device Interaction Problem (4001)
Patient Problems Dysphagia/ Odynophagia (1815); No Code Available (3191)
Event Date 10/28/2020
Event Type  Injury  
Manufacturer Narrative
(b)(4).Attempts have been made to retrieve the device.To date the device has not been returned.If the device or further details are received at a later date a supplemental medwatch will be sent.A manufacturing record evaluation was performed for the finished device lot number, and no non-conformances were identified.Additional information was requested, and the following was received: prior to linx placement, did the patient have an egd, ph, and manometry studies done? if yes, could you please share the results? yes egd, ph, - issues with where the device was sitting from endoscopy point of view and acid levels were normal on what date did the implant take place? not sure.When using the linx sizing device what technique was used to determine the size? standard practice for sizing.Did the patient have an autoimmune disease? not to the knowledge of the surgeon is the patient currently taking steroids / immunization drugs? no.Did the patient have any pre-existing dysphagia or other conditions (other than gerd)? no.How severe was the dysphagia/odynophagia before intervention? the patient managed with the dysphagia for about 6 months but just wanted the device removing 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.Were there any other contributing factors that led to the removal of the device other than the reported dysphagia? no.What was the reason for removal of the linx device? patient just wanted the device removing.Was the device found in the correct position/geometry at the time of removal? yes.If information is obtained that was not available for the initial report, a follow-up report will be field as appropriate.
 
Event Description
It was reported there was an explant of the linx device.Patient found certain types of fluid hard to swallow, no issues with food.Asked for the device to removed.
 
Manufacturer Narrative
(b)(4).Date sent: 12/14/2020.H6: investigation findings= c01.Additional information: the device was not examined in detail at the time because it formed a perfect circle with the magnets working properly so was put straight into a biohazardous bag.Did the surgeon notice anything wrong with the device prior to explant? no.Could they help us understand at what point the washer became loose? no idea, device was placed straight into a biohazardous bag.Device analysis: the explanted device was returned in one piece.The visual analysis found one washer that was detached from a bead adjacent to a clasp bead.As per additional, during the explant procedure the device was not examined in detail at the time because it formed a perfect circle with the magnets working properly.In addition, the customer did not notice anything out of ordinary.Hence, it is presumed that the washer was intact prior to explant, and was pulled out during the explant procedure due to the applied force (i.E.The loose washer didn¿t contribute to the patient¿s experience).The visual analysis excepting the unseated washer was consistent with an explanted device.Overall review of the device function and dimensions show no anomalies from a device that has been reasonably changed as part of the explant procedure.The link length and tensile force were found to meet the applicable specifications.Overall, no analysis conclusions relevant to the patient experience were found.The dhr for lot 22651 was reviewed.No ncs, defects, or reworks related to the product complaint were found.Mfg date: 08/14/2018.Exp date:08/14/2022.
 
Search Alerts/Recalls

  New Search  |  Submit an Adverse Event Report

Brand Name
LINX 1.5T 14 BEAD OUS
Type of Device
ANTI-REFLUX IMPLANT
Manufacturer (Section D)
TORAX MEDICAL, INC.
4188 lexington avenue north
shoreview MN
MDR Report Key10842960
MDR Text Key216330362
Report Number3008766073-2020-00177
Device Sequence Number1
Product Code LEI
Combination Product (y/n)N
PMA/PMN Number
P100049
Number of Events Reported1
Summary Report (Y/N)N
Report Source Manufacturer
Source Type company representative,foreig
Type of Report Initial,Followup
Report Date 10/28/2020
1 Device was Involved in the Event
1 Patient was Involved in the Event
Is this an Adverse Event Report? Yes
Is this a Product Problem Report? Yes
Device Operator Health Professional
Device Expiration Date08/14/2022
Device Catalogue NumberLXM14
Device Lot Number22651
Was Device Available for Evaluation? Device Returned to Manufacturer
Date Returned to Manufacturer12/04/2020
Initial Date Manufacturer Received 10/28/2020
Initial Date FDA Received11/16/2020
Supplement Dates Manufacturer Received12/04/2020
Supplement Dates FDA Received12/14/2020
Patient Sequence Number1
-
-