Product complaint # (b)(4).Since the product was not returned for analysis, no product failure analysis can be conducted and no determination of possible contributing factors could be made.Device history record (dhr) review cannot be conducted because the no lot number was provided by the customer.Missing information from this report is identified as blank; this information was not provided in the reported event or available at the time of report submission.Information regarding patient weight, height, medical history, race, and ethnicity was not reported cerenovus manufacturer's report numbers: 3008114965-2020-00100, 3008114965-2020-00101 are related to the same incident.
|
This complaint is from a literature source.As reported in the literature publication entitled, ¿comparison of aspiration versus stent retriever thrombectomy as the preferred strategy for patients with acute terminal internal carotid artery occlusion: a propensity score matching analysis¿ 4 patients with acute terminal internal carotid artery occlusion who underwent stent retriever thrombectomy ( from the stent retriever thrombectomy group) died due to malignant cerebral edema.The purpose of this study was to evaluate the comparative safety and efficacy of preferred aspiration thrombectomy and stent retriever thrombectomy for revascularization in patients with isolated terminal ica occlusion.Materials and methods: retrospective analysis of patients with terminal ica occlusion treated with aspiration thrombectomy or stent retriever thrombectomy was performed, from september 2013 to november 2018.Y events related to revive devices (per assumption) were captured in this complaint.
|