|
Model Number LXMC16 |
Device Problem
Adverse Event Without Identified Device or Use Problem (2993)
|
Patient Problems
Sepsis (2067); Perforation of Esophagus (2399)
|
Event Date 07/22/2017 |
Event Type
Injury
|
Event Description
|
Following a laparoscopic anti-reflux procedure, a patient was hospitalized due to surgical leak resulting in explant of the linx device.The linx device was used as part of the anti-reflux procedure.-anti-reflux procedure including hernia repair and linx device implantation occurred on (b)(6) 2017.-during hernia repair, it was noted that the hernia was larger than expected and a large amount of tissue dissection was required.-the posterior vagus nerve was cut during the implant procedure.-the device was well tolerated on (b)(6) 2017.-patient was septic and admitted to the hospital on (b)(6) 2017.-computer tomography angiography (cta) on (b)(6) 2017 showed an esophageal perforation.-device explant on (b)(6) 2017 when the patient was "finally healthy enough" to have device removed.-during explant, the device was below the ge junction due to either less than ideal placement or movement.
|
|
Event Description
|
Following a laparoscopic anti-reflux procedure, a patient was hospitalized due to surgical leak resulting in explant of the linx device.The linx device was used as part of the anti-reflux procedure.Anti-reflux procedure including a robotic paraesophageal hiatal hernia repair with biological mesh and linx device implantation occurred on (b)(6) 2017.During hernia repair, it was noted that the hernia was larger than expected and a large amount of tissue dissection was required.The posterior vagus nerve was "inadvertently" cut during the implant procedure.The patient remained in the hospital to recover from the hernia repair and implant.The device was well tolerated on (b)(6) 2017.Patient was septic and a surgical leak was discovered on (b)(6) 2017.The leak was into the left chest, no the mediastinum.Computer tomography angiography (cta) on (b)(6) 2017 showed an esophageal perforation.Patient underwent surgery including a left thoracotomy and a drainage procedure.The patient was medically paralyzed for 1 month after implant.The patient's stomach re-herniated.The physician believes this was due to coughing or retching in the first few days after the hernia repair was performed, which "undid" or "ripped" the repair.A barium swallow showed that the linx device "slipped onto the stomach", "was in the wrong place", and "was expanded." the physician believes the reason for the device's position was "it did not have the anchor of the posterior vagus nerve." device explant on (b)(6) 2017 when the patient was "finally healthy enough" to have device removed.Patient is "doing much better" as of (b)(6) 2017.
|
|
Event Description
|
Following a laparoscopic anti-reflux procedure, a patient was hospitalized due to surgical leak resulting in explant of the linx device.The linx device was used as part of the anti-reflux procedure.-anti-reflux procedure including a robotic paraesophageal hiatal hernia repair with biological mesh and linx device implantation occurred on (b)(6) 2017 -during hernia repair, it was noted that the hernia was larger than expected and a large amount of tissue dissection was required.-the posterior vagus nerve was "inadvertently" cut during the implant procedure.-the patient remained in the hospital to recover from the hernia repair and implant.-the device was well tolerated on (b)(6) 2017.-patient was septic and a surgical leak was discovered on (b)(6) 2017.The leak was into the left chest, no the mediastinum.-computer tomography angiography (cta) on (b)(6) 2017 showed an esophageal perforation.-patient underwent surgery including a left thoracotomy and a drainage procedure.-the patient was medically paralyzed for 1 month after implant.-the patient's stomach re-herniated.The physician believes this was due to coughing or retching in the first few days after the hernia repair was performed, which "undid" or "ripped" the repair.-a barium swallow showed that the linx device "slipped onto the stomach", "was in the wrong place", and "was expanded." the physician believes the reason for the device's position was "it did not have the anchor of the posterior vagus nerve." -device explant on (b)(6) 2017 when the patient was "finally healthy enough" to have device removed.-patient is "doing much better" as of (b)(6) 2017.
|
|
Manufacturer Narrative
|
-updated to include device information.-updated to include device manufacture date.-updated to include manufacturing review method code.-updated report date.
|
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|
|
|