|
BOSTON SCIENTIFIC CORPORATION WALLFLEX BILIARY TRANSHEPATIC; CATHETER, BILIARY, DIAGNOSTIC
|
Back to Search Results |
|
| Model Number |
20234 |
| Medical Device Problem Codes |
Device Markings/Labelling Problem (2911); Migration (4003)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Code |
Pain (1994)
|
| Date of Event |
06/09/2022
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Serious Injury
|
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
It was reported that a covered stent, labeled as an uncovered stent, was implanted and partially migrated.A wallflex transhepatic uc 10mmx100mm self-expanding stent was used in a biliary stent procedure, for duodenal stenosis.The stent was implanted and the procedure ended successfully.Three days later, the patient returned to the hospital with pain/complications.An upper gastrointestinal endoscopy was performed.The stenosis and the biliary stent were easily passed with a therapeutic gastroscope.The biliary stent was seen, partially migrated, but still largely within the biliary tree.The physician elected not to place a duodenal stent.The patient would be upgraded to a soft diet and aim for discharge.Additionally, it was noted that when the uncovered stent was viewed endoscopically, it appeared to be a covered stent.Further information was reported indicating that the patient needed a second intervention.At that time no retrieval hook was found.No additional patient complications were reported.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
The wallflex transhepatic stent was not returned, as it remains implanted.However images provided by the field were reviewed.Imaging of the stent placement procedure revealed that a 10 cm stent was placed.A long segment of the stent was deployed in the duodenum.This length of the stent that was deployed in the duodenum, corresponds to the length of the stent visualized in the endoscopic image.Fluoroscopic images of the percutaneous stent placement procedure showed that there is no retrieval loop on the implanted stent.Additionally, it was confirmed that this device met manufacturing specification prior to distribution and there were no manufacturing deviations which could have contributed to the reported event.However, without proper evaluation of the device, the clinical observations cannot be confirmed.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|
|
|