Manufacturing review: the device history record review could not be performed as the lot number is unknown.Investigation summary: the device was not returned for evaluation.Medical records were provided and reviewed.Post filter deployment, computed tomography revealed the inferior vena cava filter was present with significant anterior tilt, the apex of the filter located 10 mm inferior to the retro aortic left renal vein.The apex of the filter was extending beyond the margin of the inferior vena cava however no clear fat plane between the filter apex and the inferior vena cava.The four inferior vena cava filter struts demonstrated definite perforation with clear fat planes between and anterior, right anterior, and posterior strut.A left anterior strut appeared to abut the right common iliac artery at the level of its origin.Therefore, the investigation is confirmed for perforation of the inferior vena cava (ivc) and filter tilt.Based upon the available information, the definitive root cause is unknown.Labeling review: a review of product labeling documents (e.G.Procedural instructions, indications, warnings, precautions, cautions, possible complications, contraindications, and unit label) showed that the product labeling is adequate.
|
It was reported through the litigation process that a vena cava filter placement reason was not provided.At some time, post filter deployment, it was alleged that the filter tilted, struts and apex perforated into the organs.The device has not been removed and there were no reported attempts made to retrieve the filter.The patient reportedly expired.
|