MAUDE Adverse Event Report: COOK INC GUNTHER TULIP FEMORAL VENA CAVA FILTER SET; DTK FILTER, INTRAVASCULAR, CARDIOVASCULAR

Catalog Number IGTCFS-65-FEM

Device Problems Difficult to Remove (1528); Obstruction of Flow (2423); Structural Problem (2506)

Patient Problems Perforation of Vessels (2135); Obstruction/Occlusion (2422); Thrombosis/Thrombus (4440)

Event Type  Injury  

Manufacturer Narrative

Initial reporter occupation: non-healthcare professional.Investigation: the reported allegations have been further investigated based on the information provided to date.The following allegations have been investigated: chronic occlusion, difficult removal, and ivc reconstruction.Ivc occlusion/ thrombosis, new dvt, ivc stenosis as a reported complication, is a known risk in relation to filter implant and is well documented in the clinical literature and in clinical practice guidelines.This is supported by the clinical evidence report established to assess available clinical data to identify and evaluate the clinical safety and performance of the cook vena cava filters.Potential adverse events that may occur include, but are not limited to, the following: vena cava occlusion or thrombosis, vena cava stenosis, deep vein thrombosis.Physician practice guidelines and published guidance from regulatory agencies recommend that patients with indwelling filters undergo routine follow-up.The risks/benefits of filter retrieval should be considered for each patient during follow-up.Once protection from pe is no longer necessary, filter retrieval should be considered.Filter retrieval should be attempted when feasible and clinically indicated.Filter retrieval is a patient-specific, clinically complex decision; the decision to remove a filter should be based on each patient¿s individual risk/benefit profile (e.G., a patient¿s continued need for protection from pe compared to their experience with and (or) ongoing risk of experiencing filter-related complications).For all retrievable ivc filters, retrieval becomes more challenging with time, and this is commonly due to encapsulation of the filter legs or hook (in a tilted filter) by tissue ingrowth.The filter is designed to be retrieved with the günther tulip vena cava filter retrieval set.It may also be retrieved with the cloversnare® vascular retriever.Cook has not performed testing to evaluate the safety or effectiveness of filter retrieval using other retrieval systems or techniques.The published clinical literature includes descriptions of alternative techniques for filter retrieval; use of these techniques varies according to physician experience, patient anatomy, and filter position.The safety or effectiveness of these alternative retrieval techniques has not been established.Specific for ¿embedded¿ a filter that is embedded in the wall of the ivc may be difficult to retrieve.For all retrievable ivc filters, retrieval becomes more challenging with time, and this is commonly due to encapsulation of the filter legs or hook (in a tilted filter) by tissue ingrowth.Unknown if the reported inferior vena cava (ivc) reconstruction is directly related to the filter and unable to identify a corresponding failure mode at this point in time.Catalog number and lot number are unknown, however, the alleged tulip is manufactured and inspected according to specifications.No evidence to suggest that this device was not manufactured according to specifications and nothing indicates that the filter did not perform as intended, e.G.Intended for the prevention of recurrent pulmonary embolism (pe) via placement in the vena cava.Cook will reopen its investigation if further information is received warranting supplementation in accordance with 21 c.F.R.803.56.This report includes information known at this time.A follow-up medwatch report will be submitted if additional relevant information becomes available.

Event Description

The following information is alleged: the patient received a gunther tulip inferior vena cava (ivc) filter on (b)(6) 2006 and subsequently experienced chronic occlusion of the ivc as a result of the filter which led to the patient having to undergo a complex removal procedure using bronchoscopy forceps.The patient's filter was removed in pieces, and the patient's physician then had to reconstruct the patient's ivc.Hospital and medical records have been requested, but not yet provided.

Manufacturer Narrative

Investigation: investigation is reopened due to additional information provided.The reported allegations have been further investigated based on the information provided to date.The following allegations have been investigated: vena cava (vc) perforation, vc thrombus, chronic occlusion, difficult removal, tilt, inferior vena cava (ivc) reconstruction.Filter interacts with ivc wall, e.G.Penetration/perforation/embedment.This may be either symptomatic or asymptomatic.Potential causes may include improper deployment; and (or) excessive force or manipulations near an in-situ filter (e.G., a surgical or endovascular procedure in the vicinity of a filter).Potential adverse events that may occur include, but are not limited to, the following: trauma to adjacent structures, vascular trauma, vena cava perforation, vena cava penetration.Ivc occlusion/ thrombosis, new dvt, ivc stenosis as a reported complication, is a known risk in relation to filter implant and is well documented in the clinical literature and in clinical practice guidelines.This is supported by the clinical evidence report established to assess available clinical data to identify and evaluate the clinical safety and performance of the cook vena cava filters.Potential adverse events that may occur include, but are not limited to, the following: vena cava occlusion or thrombosis, vena cava stenosis, deep vein thrombosis.Physician practice guidelines and published guidance from regulatory agencies recommend that patients with indwelling filters undergo routine follow-up.The risks/benefits of filter retrieval should be considered for each patient during follow-up.Once protection from pe is no longer necessary, filter retrieval should be considered.Filter retrieval should be attempted when feasible and clinically indicated.Filter retrieval is a patient-specific, clinically complex decision; the decision to remove a filter should be based on each patient¿s individual risk/benefit profile (e.G., a patient¿s continued need for protection from pe compared to their experience with and (or) ongoing risk of experiencing filter-related complications).For all retrievable ivc filters, retrieval becomes more challenging with time, and this is commonly due to encapsulation of the filter legs or hook (in a tilted filter) by tissue ingrowth.The filter is designed to be retrieved with the günther tulip vena cava filter retrieval set.It may also be retrieved with the cloversnare® vascular retriever.Cook has not performed testing to evaluate the safety or effectiveness of filter retrieval using other retrieval systems or techniques.The published clinical literature includes descriptions of alternative techniques for filter retrieval; use of these techniques varies according to physician experience, patient anatomy, and filter position.The safety or effectiveness of these alternative retrieval techniques has not been established.Specific for ¿embedded¿ a filter that is embedded in the wall of the ivc may be difficult to retrieve.For all retrievable ivc filters, retrieval becomes more challenging with time, and this is commonly due to encapsulation of the filter legs or hook (in a tilted filter) by tissue ingrowth.Filter tilt has been reported.Potential causes may include filter placement in ivcs with diameters larger than those specified in these instructions for use; improper deployment; manipulations near an implanted filter (e.G., a surgical or endovascular procedure in the vicinity of a filter); and (or) a failed retrieval attempt.Excessive filter tilt may contribute to difficult or failed retrieval; vena cava wall penetration/perforation; and (or) result in loss of filter efficiency.Potential adverse events that may occur include, but are not limited to, the following: unacceptable filter tilt.A total of (b)(4) devices were manufactured in the reported lot.To date, no other complaints have been reported against the lot.The associated work order was reviewed.No related/relevant notes were documented.The device is manufactured and inspected according to current controls no evidence to suggest that this device was not manufactured according to specifications and nothing indicates that the filter did not perform as intended, e.G.Intended for the prevention of recurrent pulmonary embolism (pe) via placement in the vena cava.Cook will reopen its investigation if further information is received warranting supplementation in accordance with 21 c.F.R.803.56.This report includes information known at this time.A follow-up report will be submitted should additional relevant information become available.This report is required by the fda under 21 cfr part 803 and is based on unconfirmed information submitted by others.Neither the submission of this report nor any statement contained herein is intended to be an admission that any cook device is defective or malfunctioned, that a death or serious injury occurred, nor that any cook device caused, contributed to, or is likely to cause or contribute to a death or serious injury if a malfunction occurred.

Event Description

Patient allegedly received the gunther tulip filter via the right femoral vein due to high risk for deep vein thrombosis (dvt).Patient is alleging device tilt and vena cava perforation.Per the unsuccessful filter retrieval: "an inferior vena cava gram was performed which demonstrated massive amounts of iliocaval thrombosis with a very small flow lumen preserved in the ivc.Next, a repeat inferior vena cava gram was performed through the sheath.This once again demonstrated a complete ivc filter and inferior vena cava occlusion with thrombus"."at this point, therefore, the decision was made to not intervene any further.We will recommend to the primary service to maintain the patient on long-term anticoagulation for the rest of [patient's] life".

• Brand Name: GUNTHER TULIP FEMORAL VENA CAVA FILTER SET
• Type of Device: DTK FILTER, INTRAVASCULAR, CARDIOVASCULAR
• Manufacturer (Section D): COOK INC; 750 daniels way; bloomington IN 47404
• Manufacturer (Section G): COOK INC; 750 daniels way; bloomington IN 47404
• Manufacturer Contact: larry pool ; 750 daniels way; bloomington, IN 47404 ; 8123392235
• MDR Report Key: 12635199
• MDR Text Key: 276692226
• Report Number: 1820334-2021-02335
• Device Sequence Number: 1
• Product Code: DTK
• Combination Product (y/n): N
• Reporter Country Code: US
• PMA/PMN Number: K043509
• Number of Events Reported: 1
• Summary Report (Y/N): N
• Report Source: Manufacturer
• Source Type: Other,Consumer
• Reporter Occupation: Other
• Type of Report: Initial,Followup
• Report Date: 04/28/2022

1 Device was Involved in the Event

1 Patient was Involved in the Event

• Date FDA Received: 10/14/2021
• Is this an Adverse Event Report?: Yes
• Is this a Product Problem Report?: Yes
• Device Operator: Health Professional
• Device Expiration Date: 03/01/2009
• Device Catalogue Number: IGTCFS-65-FEM
• Device Lot Number: 1687838
• Was Device Available for Evaluation?: No
• Is the Reporter a Health Professional?: No
• Date Manufacturer Received: 04/06/2022
• Was Device Evaluated by Manufacturer?: Device Not Returned to Manufacturer
• Date Device Manufactured: 04/06/2006
• Is the Device Single Use?: Yes
• Is This a Reprocessed and Reused Single-Use Device?: No
• Type of Device Usage: Initial
• Patient Sequence Number: 1
• Patient Outcome(s): Life Threatening
• Patient Sex: Male
• Patient Weight: 91 KG