|
The device was not returned for analysis.A review of the lot history record revealed no manufacturing nonconformities that would have contributed to this complaint.Additionally, a review of the complaint history identified no other incidents.The investigation determined the reported difficulties appear to be related to the operational context of the procedure.In this case, it is likely the device interacted with the mildly tortuous, moderately calcified, 90% stenosed lesion during advancement, as resistance was noted, resulting in the reported failure to advance and material deformation.Further interaction with the challenging anatomy during retraction of the device, as resistance was again noted, likely contributed to the reported difficult to remove.There is no indication of a product quality issue with respect to manufacture, design or labeling.Na.
|
|
It was reported that the procedure was to treat a mildly tortuous, moderately calcified distal right coronary artery that was 90% stenosed.After the lesion was prepped, a 2.5x38mm xience skypoint stent failed to cross due to anatomy and the stent was noted to be flared.During removal, resistance was also met with anatomy.The procedure was completed with another two stents.There were no adverse patient effects and no clinically significant delay in the procedure.No additional information was provided.
|