Information was received that 4 years after the generator explant due to infection, the patient underwent a lead explant due to infection.Due to the 4 year gap between explant procedures, it was not initially assumed that the lead explant was related to the same infection as the generator explant.The lead explant due to infection was previously reported in mfr.Report # 1644487-2019-02385.As it is now known that the explant procedures are related to the same infection, all further investigation and reporting will occur in association with mfr.Report # 1644487-2015-05449, including the assessment of this new information.The physician noted that 2 days prior to the lead explant, the patient presented with dehiscence of the chest wound, and the physician determined that the lead must be explanted for the infection to resolve.The physician reported that the infection that caused the lead explant was a continuation of the same infection that caused the generator explant.Per the physician's assessment, the dehiscence wound is due to the infection.The physician previously indicated that the infection was not related to vns therapy or surgery.A review of device history records showed that the lead was sterilized prior to distribution.No unresolved non-conformances were found.Product return and device evaluation is not necessary as the reported infection and wound dehiscence is not related to the functionality or delivery of therapy of the device.No additional relevant information has been received to date.
|