| Model Number |
S201 |
| Medical Device Problem Codes |
Signal Artifact/Noise (1036); Over-Sensing (1438); Connection Problem (2900); Impedance Problem (2950); Material Integrity Problem (2978); High Capture Threshold (3266)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Code |
No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions (4582)
|
| Date of Event |
04/01/2022
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Serious Injury
|
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
If the product is returned, analysis would be performed and this report would be updated at that time.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
It was reported that this implantable pulse generator (pacemaker) was explanted and replaced due to normal battery depletion, but also due to suspicions of interaction issues with the left atrium (la) lead.Reportedly, impedance issues, high capture thresholds and noise events were noticed for months, and it was believed there was an integrity issue with the la lead.However, during the replacement procedure, the lead was tested in the analyzer and no inadequate measurements were noticed.Thus, it was decided to keep the lead implanted and only the pacemaker was replaced.In addition, it was stated that the patient fell a few times over the last months, not related to this pacemaker performance, and it was suspected that this caused the connection issue.This pacemaker is expected to be returned for analysis and no additional adverse patient effects were reported.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
If the product is returned, analysis would be performed and this report would be updated at that time.Upon receipt at our post market quality assurance laboratory, this implantable pulse generator (pacemaker) was thoroughly inspected and analyzed.Visual inspection found no anomalies.The analysis found no evidence of device defect, malfunction or damage outside the bounds of normal medical use.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
It was reported that this implantable pulse generator (pacemaker) was explanted and replaced due to normal battery depletion, but also due to suspicions of interaction issues with the left atrium (la) lead.Reportedly, impedance issues, high capture thresholds and oversensed noise events were noticed for months, and it was believed there was an integrity issue with the la lead.However, no pacing inhibition or asystole was noticed, the patient always had an intrinsic beat.Reportedly, during the replacement procedure, the lead was tested in the analyzer and no inadequate measurements were noticed.Thus, it was decided to keep the lead implanted and only the pacemaker was replaced.In addition, it was stated that the patient fell a few times over the last months, not related to this pacemaker performance, and it was suspected that this caused the connection issue.This pacemaker was returned for analysis and no additional adverse patient effects were reported.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|