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

MAUDE Adverse Event Report: BARD PERIPHERAL VASCULAR, INC. VENA CAVA FILTER

  • 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
 

BARD PERIPHERAL VASCULAR, INC. VENA CAVA FILTER Back to Search Results
Catalog Number UNKNOWN FILTER
Device Problems Difficult to Remove (1528); Migration (4003)
Patient Problem Cardiac Perforation (2513)
Event Date 10/17/2007
Event Type  Injury  
Event Description
It was reported through the litigation process that a vena cava filter was placed in a patient and the reason for deployment was not provided.At sometime post filter deployment, it was alleged that the filter was migrated to the right atrium and the filter perforated into the right atrium.The device has not been removed after an attempted but unsuccessful percutaneous removal procedure.However, the current status of the patient is unknown.
 
Manufacturer Narrative
As the lot number for the device was not provided, a review of the device history records could not be performed.The device has not been returned to the manufacturer for evaluation.The investigation of the reported event is currently underway.Date of event was entered as date of awareness due to system limitations, since date of event was unknown.Device not returned.
 
Manufacturer Narrative
H10: manufacturing review: a manufacturing review was not requested as the lot number reported is unknown.Investigation summary: the device was not returned for evaluation.The medical records included images.The image review was documented in the medical records.Medical records were provided and reviewed.Approximately, one year three months of post deployment, an x-ray of chest was performed.The study showed that a filter device was noted in the region of the right atrium.Around, two years and four months later, in a pre-operative physician evaluation, it was mentioned that the patient had an inferior vena cava filter and an x-ray study of last year surprisingly showed evidence for migration of inferior vena cava filter to the right atrium.However, at the current time, the x-rays were reviewed which certainly confirmed that the vena cava filter was in the right atrium.Discussions were made between the physicians for further review of the x-rays and to see whether it was retrievable from a percutaneous approach.After, nineteen days, an attempt was made to retrieve the right atrial foreign body, presumed to be the inferior vena cava filter.Initially venous access was obtained from a right common femoral vein approach with ultrasound and fluoroscopic guidance.A filter was noted to be present within the inferior vena cava.However, upon questioning the patient, she was unaware when this might have been placed.Therefore, attention was directed to the right internal jugular vein for access.Ultrasound and fluoroscopic guidance were again used to facilitate venous access and a 6-french sheath was placed.A 6-french snare was advanced into the right atrium and used to select the struts of the device.Multiple struts could easily be snared on several occasions, but the device was fixed in place and the procedure was then terminated.Finally, it was concluded with an unsuccessful right atrial foreign body retrieval.Therefore, the investigation is confirmed for the filter migration and retrieval difficulties.The definitive root cause could not be determined based upon available information.Labeling review: a review of product labeling documentation (e.G., procedural instructions, indications, warnings, precautions, cautions, possible complications, contraindications, nursing guide, and unit label) did not find any product labeling inadequacy.H10: g3, h6(method) h11: b3,h6(result and conclusion) h11: section a through f - the information provided by bd represents all of the known information at this time.Despite good faith efforts to obtain additional information, the complainant / reporter was unable or unwilling to provide any further patient, product, or procedural details to bd.H3 other text : device not returned.
 
Event Description
It was reported through the litigation process that a vena cava filter was placed in a patient and the reason for deployment was not provided.At sometime post filter deployment, it was alleged that the filter was migrated to the right atrium and the filter perforated into the right atrium.The device has not been removed after an attempted but unsuccessful percutaneous removal procedure.However, the current status of the patient is unknown.
 
Search Alerts/Recalls

  New Search  |  Submit an Adverse Event Report

Brand Name
VENA CAVA FILTER
Type of Device
VENA CAVA FILTER
Manufacturer (Section D)
BARD PERIPHERAL VASCULAR, INC.
1625 w 3rd st.
tempe AZ 85281
Manufacturer (Section G)
C.R. BARD, INC. (GFO)
289 bay road
queensbury 12804
Manufacturer Contact
judy ludwig
800 w. rio salado pkwy
tempe, AZ 85281
4803032689
MDR Report Key13266368
MDR Text Key283957839
Report Number2020394-2022-00011
Device Sequence Number1
Product Code DTK
Combination Product (y/n)N
Reporter Country CodeUS
PMA/PMN Number
UNKNOWN
Number of Events Reported1
Summary Report (Y/N)N
Report Source Manufacturer
Source Type Other,Consumer,Health Professional
Reporter Occupation Non-Healthcare Professional
Type of Report Initial,Followup
Report Date 01/31/2022
1 Device was Involved in the Event
1 Patient was Involved in the Event
Date FDA Received01/17/2022
Is this an Adverse Event Report? Yes
Is this a Product Problem Report? Yes
Device Operator Health Professional
Device Catalogue NumberUNKNOWN FILTER
Device Lot NumberUNKNOWN
Was Device Available for Evaluation? No
Date Manufacturer Received02/02/2022
Was Device Evaluated by Manufacturer? Device Not Returned to Manufacturer
Is the Device Single Use? Yes
Is This a Reprocessed and Reused Single-Use Device? No
Type of Device Usage Initial
Patient Sequence Number1
Treatment
BACLOFEN, AMBIEN, WARFARIN, COLESTID; BACLOFEN, AMBIEN, WARFARIN, COLESTID; COUMADIN, VICODIN, OXYCONTIN, FENTANYL; COUMADIN, VICODIN, OXYCONTIN, FENTANYL; ZONEGRAN, NEXIUM, ADVAIR, DARVOCET AND ALLEGRA; ZONEGRAN, NEXIUM, ADVAIR, DARVOCET AND ALLEGRA
Patient Outcome(s) Required Intervention; Other;
Patient Age31 YR
Patient SexFemale
Patient RaceWhite
-
-