As reported, the patient underwent placement of a trapease vena cava filter.The filter subsequently malfunctioned and caused injury, damage, to the patient, including, but not limited to post-implant deep vein thrombosis (dvt), pulmonary embolism (pe) and thrombosis.As a direct and proximate result of these malfunctions, the patient suffered life-threatening injuries and damages, and required extensive medical care and treatment.As a further proximate result, the patient has suffered and will continue to suffer significant medical expenses, and pain and suffering, and other damages.The device was not returned for analysis.A device history record (dhr) review could not be conducted as the sterile lot number was not provided.The inferior vena cava filter is indicated for use in the prevention of recurrent pulmonary embolism (pe) via percutaneous placement in the vena cava for patients in which anticoagulants are contraindicated, anticoagulant therapy for thromboembolic disease has failed, emergency treatment following massive pulmonary embolism where anticipated benefits of conventional therapy are reduced or for chronic, recurrent pulmonary embolism where anticoagulant therapy has failed, or is contraindicated.The purpose of a vena cava filter is to catch thrombus from the lower extremities as it travels along normal blood flow patterns up towards the heart.Blood clots that develop in the veins of the leg or pelvis, may be related to a condition called deep vein thrombosis (dvt).Deep vein thrombosis (dvt) occurs when a blood clot forms in a deep vein and is most common in the deep veins of the lower leg (calf) and can spread up to the veins in the thigh.Placement of a vena cava filter is not a cure for dvt nor does it prevent the formation of dvt or other clots (thrombosis).Large thrombus within the vena cava or lower extremities may impede perfusion and cause venous insufficiency.Clinical factors that may have influenced the event include patient, pharmacological, lesion characteristics or other comorbidities.The presence of these clots do not represent a device malfunction.There is no medical evidence of a causal relationship between the vena cava filter and the formation of new dvt and thrombosis.Recurrent pulmonary embolism is a known potential complication of filter implantation and is listed in the instructions for use (ifu) as such.There are possible patient and pharmacological factors that may have contributed to the reported event.Based on the minimal information provided, it is not possible to draw a clinical conclusion or determine a root cause for the reported event.Given the limited information available for review at this time, there is nothing to suggest that the reported event is related to the design, manufacturing process or implantation of the device; therefore no corrective action will be taken.Should additional information become available, the file will be updated accordingly.
|
As reported by the legal brief, the patient underwent placement of trapease vena cava filter.The filter subsequently malfunctioned and caused injury, damage, to the patient, including, but not limited to post-implant deep vein thrombosis (dvt), pulmonary embolism (pe) and thrombosis.As a direct and proximate result of these malfunctions, the patient suffered life-threatening injuries and damages, and required extensive medical care and treatment.As a further proximate result the patient has suffered and will continue to suffer significant medical expenses, and pain and suffering, and other damages.
|