• Decrease font size
  • Return font size to normal
  • Increase font size
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services

MAUDE Adverse Event Report: CORDIS CORPORATION UNKNOWN OPTEASE VENA CAVA FILTER; FILTER, INTRAVASCULAR, CARDIOVASCULAR

  • Print
  • Share
  • E-mail
-
Super Search Devices@FDA
510(k) | DeNovo | Registration & Listing | Adverse Events | Recalls | PMA | HDE | Classification | Standards
CFR Title 21 | Radiation-Emitting Products | X-Ray Assembler | Medsun Reports | CLIA | TPLC
 

CORDIS CORPORATION UNKNOWN OPTEASE VENA CAVA FILTER; FILTER, INTRAVASCULAR, CARDIOVASCULAR Back to Search Results
Catalog Number 466FXXXX
Device Problems Fracture (1260); Unintended Movement (3026)
Patient Problems Abdominal Pain (1685); Internal Organ Perforation (1987)
Event Date 08/04/2021
Event Type  Injury  
Manufacturer Narrative
As reported, the patient underwent placement of an optease retrievable vena cava filter.The indication for the filter placement was not reported.At some point after the filter implantation, the patient became aware that the filter had tilted and fractured and was associated with organ perforation.The product was not returned for analysis and the sterile lot number has not been provided; therefore, no device analysis nor device history record review could be performed.The optease retrievable vena cava filter is indicated for use in the prevention of recurrent pulmonary embolism (pe) via percutaneous placement in the inferior vena cava (ivc) for patients in which anticoagulants are contraindicated, anticoagulant therapy for thromboembolic disease has failed, emergency treatment following massive pe where anticipated benefits of conventional therapy are reduced or for chronic, recurrent pe where anticoagulant therapy has failed, or is contraindicated.The purpose of a vena cava filter is to catch thrombus from the lower extremities as it travels along normal blood flow patterns up towards the heart.Without images or procedural films for review, the reported filter tilt, fracture and organ perforation events could not be confirmed and the exact cause could not be determined.Ivc filter tilt has been associated with the anatomy of the vessel, specifically asymmetry and tortuousness.Additionally, the timing and mechanism of the filter tilt is unknown.The timing and mechanism of the fracture has not been reported at this time.The instructions for use (ifu) states that filter fracture is a potential complication of vena cava filters.Anatomic locations that create concentrated stress points from filter deformation (for example, deployment at apex of scoliosis, overlapping of either of the renal ostia, or placement adjacent to a vertebral osteophyte) may contribute to fracture of a particular filter strut.It is unknown if the tilt contributed to the reported perforation.A review of the ifu notes vessel damage such as intimal tears and perforation as procedural complications related to ivc filters.Perforation from removable filters is relatively common, and directly related to how long the filter has been in place.Studies have noted a greater than 80% perforation rate overall, with all filters imaged after 71 days from implantation revealing some level of perforation.Clinical factors that may have influenced the event include the patient¿s pre-existing co-morbidities, pharmacological issues and lesion characteristics.Given the limited information available for review, there is nothing to suggest that a malfunction in the design and manufacturing process of the device; therefore, no corrective action will be taken.Should additional information become available, the file will be updated accordingly.
 
Event Description
As reported in the legal brief, a patient underwent placement of an optease vena cava filter.The filter subsequently malfunctioned and caused injury and damage to the patient, including, but not limited to fracture of the filter, organ perforation and tilting.As a direct and proximate result, the patient suffered life-threatening injuries and damages and required extensive medical care and treatment.As a further proximate result, the patient has suffered and will suffer significant medical expenses, pain and suffering and other damages.
 
Manufacturer Narrative
As reported a patient underwent placement of an optease vena cava filter.The information provided indicated that the filter subsequently malfunctioned and caused fracture of the filter, organ perforation and tilting.The patient reported becoming aware of the events approximately one year and two months post implant.The patient reports adverse event of perforation of filter strut(s) outside of the inferior vena cava perforation (ivc) and abdominal pain.The product remains implant and unavailable for analysis, the sterile lot number has not been provided; therefore, no device analysis nor device history record review could be performed.The optease vena cava filter is indicated for use in the prevention of recurrent pulmonary embolism (pe) via percutaneous placement in the vena cava for patients in which anticoagulants are contraindicated, anticoagulant therapy for thromboembolic disease has failed, emergency treatment following massive pe where anticipated benefits of conventional therapy are reduced or for chronic, recurrent pe where anticoagulant therapy has failed, or is contraindicated.The purpose of a vena cava filter is to catch thrombus from the lower extremities as it travels along normal blood flow patterns up towards the heart.Ivc filter tilt has been associated with operator technique and vessel anatomy, specifically asymmetry and tortuosity.Vessel perforation is a known adverse event associated with implanting vena cava filters and is listed as such in the instructions for use (ifu).The ifu also notes vessel damage such as intimal tears and perforation as procedural and long-term complications related to ivc filters.The ifu also states that filter fracture with perforation is a potential complication of vena cava filters.Anatomic locations that create concentrated stress points from filter deformation (for example, deployment at apex of scoliosis, overlapping of either of the renal ostia, or placement adjacent to a vertebral osteophyte) may contribute to fracture of a particular filter strut.The timing and mechanism of the events has not been reported at this time and a clinical conclusion could not be determined as to the cause of the events.Without images available for review the reported events could not be confirmed or further clarified.Due to the nature of the complaint and the limited information provided the reported abdominal pain could not be further clarified nor a cause attributed.Pain does not represent a device malfunction and may be related to underlying patient specific issues.Given the limited information available for review at this time, there is nothing to suggest that the reported events are related to the design and manufacturing process of the device; therefore, no corrective action will be taken.Should additional information become available, the file will be updated accordingly.
 
Search Alerts/Recalls

  New Search  |  Submit an Adverse Event Report

Brand Name
UNKNOWN OPTEASE VENA CAVA FILTER
Type of Device
FILTER, INTRAVASCULAR, CARDIOVASCULAR
Manufacturer (Section D)
CORDIS CORPORATION
14201 nw 60th ave
miami lakes FL 33014 2802
Manufacturer (Section G)
CORDIS CORPORATION
14201 nw 60th ave
miami lakes FL 33014 2802
Manufacturer Contact
karla castro
14201 nw 60th ave
miami lakes, FL 33014-2802
7863138372
MDR Report Key12359028
MDR Text Key267849752
Report Number1016427-2021-05332
Device Sequence Number1
Product Code DTK
Combination Product (y/n)N
Reporter Country CodeUS
PMA/PMN Number
K034050
Number of Events Reported1
Summary Report (Y/N)N
Report Source Manufacturer
Source Type Other
Reporter Occupation Other
Type of Report Initial,Followup
Report Date 11/05/2021
1 Device was Involved in the Event
1 Patient was Involved in the Event
Date FDA Received08/24/2021
Is this an Adverse Event Report? Yes
Is this a Product Problem Report? Yes
Device Operator Health Professional
Device Catalogue Number466FXXXX
Was Device Available for Evaluation? No
Is the Reporter a Health Professional? No
Date Manufacturer Received10/14/2021
Is the Device Single Use? Yes
Is This a Reprocessed and Reused Single-Use Device? No
Type of Device Usage Initial
Patient Sequence Number1
Patient Outcome(s) Life Threatening;
Patient SexFemale
-
-