| Model Number |
1012276-20 |
| Medical Device Problem Codes |
Difficult to Remove (1528); Material Separation (1562); Difficult to Advance (2920)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Code |
No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions (4582)
|
| Date of Event |
08/28/2021
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Serious Injury
|
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
The device is expected to be returned for investigation.It has not yet been received.A follow-up report will be submitted with all additional relevant information.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
It was reported that the procedure was to treat a de novo, 90% stenosed, heavily calcified and heavily tortuous vessel in the left circumflex (lcx) artery.The 3.5x20mm nc trek balloon dilatation catheter (bdc) was advanced with resistance noted with the lesion.The trek bdc was used for pre-dilatation, however, the bdc separated at the distal portion before the balloon.There was some resistance with the anatomy during removal.The device was retrieved from the vessel with a balloon anchor.A 3.5x20mm non-abbott device was used to complete the procedure.There was no reported adverse patient sequela and there was no reported clinically significant delay in the procedure.No additional information was provided.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
It was reported that the procedure was to treat a de novo, 90% stenosed, heavily calcified and heavily tortuous vessel in the left circumflex (lcx) artery.The 3.5x20mm nc trek balloon dilatation catheter (bdc) was advanced with resistance noted with the lesion.The trek bdc was used for pre-dilatation, however, the bdc separated at the distal portion before the balloon.There was some resistance with the anatomy during removal.The device was retrieved from the vessel with a balloon anchor.A 3.5x20mm non-abbott device was used to complete the procedure.There was no reported adverse patient sequela and there was no reported clinically significant delay in the procedure.No additional information was provided.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
A visual inspection was performed on the returned device.The reported separation was confirmed.The reported difficulty advancing and removing the device from the anatomy could not be replicated in a testing environment as it was based on operational circumstances.A review of the lot history record identified no manufacturing nonconformities issued to the reported lot that would have contributed to this event.Additionally, a review of the complaint history of the reported lot did not indicate a lot specific quality issue.The investigation determined the reported complaints, additional treatment and removal of foreign body appear to be related to circumstance of the procedure.There is no indication of a product quality issue with respects to the design, manufacture, or labeling of the device.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|