Same case as mdr id 2134265-2018-02388 and 2134265-2018-02390.(b)(4) clinical study.It was reported that restenosis occurred.In (b)(6) 2013, the patient was presented due to myocardial infarction (mi) and unstable angina, and was referred for cardiac catheterization.The index procedure was performed on the same day.Target lesion was a de novo and culprit lesion for st-elevation myocardial infarction located in the mid right coronary artery (rca) with 100% stenosis and was 20 mm long with a reference vessel diameter of 3.5 mm.The lesion was treated with thrombectomy, pre-dilatation and placement of a 3.50x24mm promus element¿ plus stent, with 10% residual stenosis.Five days after, the patient discharged on aspirin and prasugrel.In (b)(6) 2015, the patient presented with apical ischemia.A 4.00 x 20 mm promus element¿ plus stent was implanted in the mid rca and a 4.00 x 32 mm promus element¿ plus stent was implanted in the distal rca.In (b)(6) 2017, the patient presented with the complaints of chest pain and exertional dyspnea and was referred for cardiac catheterization which revealed 60% restenosis of mid rca and moderate rca stenosis.On the same day, the patient underwent fluoroscopy which demonstrated normal cardiac silhouette with visible coronary calcification and visible stent in rca.Subsequently, the patient was recommended for coronary artery bypass graft (cabg).In (b)(6) 2017, the patient presented for planned cabg and the patient was hospitalized on the same day.The patient underwent cabg including reverse saphenous vein graft to distal rca.On the same day, the patient underwent aortic valve replacement.Eleven days later, the events were considered resolved and the patient was discharged on the same day.
|