Manufacturing review: a lot history review was performed.This is the only complaint to date for this lot number.Therefore, a device history record review is not required.Investigation summary: the device was not returned for evaluation.Medical records were provided and reviewed.Approximately, thirteen years later computed tomography revealed that there was an inferior vena cava filter in place with tip 4 mm inferior to lowest renal vein.The filter apex was relatively well centered in the inferior vena cava with approximately 4 degrees posterior tilt.The 6 centering arms and 6 legs were intact without strut fracture or bending.At least 4 of the centering arms perforated the inferior vena cava into the surrounding fat, with the anterior limb abutting but not perforating the duodenum.This arm extended furthest from the inferior vena cava wall with 5.5mm between the strut and the inferior vena cava.The remaining 2 arms projected beyond the expected margin of the inferior vena cava without a definitive fat plane between the inferior vena cava wall and distal arm.4 of the lower legs perforated the inferior vena cava with the anterior limb extending 4mm into the anterior soft tissues abutting the gonadal vein without perforation.The left lateral legs perforate through the inferior vena cava wall into the aorta, extending 6mm beyond the inferior vena cava wall into the aorta.Therefore, the investigation is confirmed for positioning issue and perforation of inferior vena cava (ivc).Based on 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.
|