Coloplast has not been provided any corroborating evidence to verify the information contained in this report.Without the benefit of examination and testing, coloplast is precluded from commenting on the condition of the device or the cause of the occurrence.Should additional facts prompt us to alter or supplement any information or conclusions contained in the original mdr or in any prior supplemental reports, a follow-up report will be submitted.
|
As reported to coloplast, though not verified, the patient with this device experienced recurrent urinary tract infections, dyspareunia, and difficulty passing through a catheter.Mid urethral device erosion into urethra with calcifications over top of the device were found during vaginoscopy with cystoscopy examination under anesthesia.Ureterolysis was performed with a partial urethral wall excision, along with a urethral fistula or defect closure that included a complex urethral reconstruction, and extensive vaginal mucosa trimming.It was noted the interoperative findings included a large flap of device from about the six o¿clock to the two o¿clock position and the right side of the device was noted to be banded and completely looped.A large defect within urethra that included extensive edematous mucosa was also noted.The patient also experienced severe intrinsic sphincter deficient type incontinence.Intraoperative findings noted that a stamey needle used as the cooper ligament was not strong enough to use a suture capturing device and the device was implanted restrictively, especially near bladder neck and proximal urethra.
|