The oad was received for analysis.No visible damage was observed.A guide wire was passed through the oad with no resistance.When tested, the oad functioned as intended.At the conclusion of the device analysis, the reported event of slow flow was unable to be confirmed.The device history record for this oad lot number has been reviewed.No issues or discrepancies were noted during this review that would have contributed to the reported event.The device met material, assembly, and quality control requirements.Csi id# (b)(4).
|
A stealth peripheral orbital atherectomy device (oad) was selected for treatment of a lesion from the superficial femoral artery to the popliteal artery.The lesion was initially wired with a non-csi guide wire and an exchange was performed for a viperwire guide wire.The lesion was divided into five (5) segments, and each segment was treated with one treatment on low, two treatments on medium, and two treatments on high speed.The treatments were all 30 seconds, and vasodilators were administered twice during treatment.After treatment, slow flow was observed.Balloon angioplasty was performed.Lumen gain was observed, however, the flow was still slow.Stents were deployed in the sfa.The final angiography showed slower flow than baseline angioplasty.The possibility of dissection was ruled out.The physician does not plan to administer additional treatment for the slow flow.
|