Device is a combination product.Device evaluated by mfr.: the device was not returned for analysis.The manufacturing batch record review confirmed that the device met all material, assembly and performance specifications.The investigation conclusion is anticipated procedural complication as the event is due to a known physiological effect of the procedure noted within the directions for use, and/or device labeling.(b)(4).
|
(b)(6) clinical study.It was reported that chest discomfort and in-stent restenosis occurred.In (b)(6) 2013, the subject presented with silent ischemia and was diagnosed with stable angina.The subject was then referred for cardiac catheterization and the index procedure was performed on the same day.The target lesion was a de novo lesion located in the distal left circumflex artery (lcx) with 80% stenosis and was 12 mm long with a reference vessel diameter of 2.5 mm.It was treated with pre-dilatation and placement of a 2.50 x 16 mm promus element¿ plus study stent.Following post-dilatation, residual stenosis was 0%.On the same day, the subject was discharged on aspirin and clopidogrel.In (b)(6) 2017, the subject presented with progressive accelerating exertional chest discomfort.Subsequently, the subject was hospitalized and coronary angiography was permed which revealed an 80% in-stent restenosis (isr) of the previously implanted 2.50 x 16 mm promus element¿ plus study stent in distal lcx.The stress test performed on the same day revealed distal, anterior, apical and posterolateral lateral wall ischemia.The subject was hospitalized and referred for cardiac catheterization.The 80% isr of distal lcx was treated with pre-dilation and placement of 2.25 x 32 mm synergy drug eluting stent within the previously placed proximal and distal stents.Following post-dilatation, residual stenosis was 0%.The following day, subject was discharged in stable ambulatory condition.
|