Manufacturing review: the device history records have been reviewed with special attention to the raw materials, subassemblies, manufacturing process, and quality control testing.This lot met all release criteria.There was nothing found to indicate there was a manufacturing related cause for this event.Investigation summary: the device was not returned for evaluation.Medical records were provided and reviewed.Approximately seven years and two months of post deployment, the patient was found to have a personal history of pulmonary embolism.On the same day, a computed tomography (ct) venogram showed 1 strut of the inferior vena cava filter extended into the duodenum and there was a doubt in the etiology of prior abdominal pain.Around three years and two months later, contiguous axial images using computed tomography (ct) abdomen and pelvis with intravenous and oral contrast showed that there was no evidence of inferior vena cava thrombosis.An infrarenal inferior vena cava filter was noted.At least 1 strut of the filter appeared to penetrate the wall of the inferior vena cava, and might have extend into the third portion of the duodenum or the periduodenal soft tissues.Therefore, the investigation is confirmed for the perforation of the ivc.Additionally, it can be confirmed that the patient experienced pe post deployment.However, the relationship to the filter is unknown.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.(expiry date: 08/2011).
|