| Model Number |
FDS45040 |
| Medical Device Problem Code |
Adverse Event Without Identified Device or Use Problem (2993)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Code |
Stenosis (2263)
|
| Date of Event |
08/03/2022
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Serious Injury
|
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
The subject device is implanted inside the patient's vasculature.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
It was reported that the subject flow diverter stent was implanted in the cavernous segment of the internal carotid artery on (b)(6) 2021.Nine months post procedure during routine follow-up angiogram was performed which reveled hundred percent stenosis of the patient's internal carotid artery and the subject flow diverter stent.There was no blood flow distal to the stenosis.It was reported that the patient was asymptomatic.It was reported that the subject flow diverter stent performed as intended during deployment.According to the physician the stenosis of the parent vessel artery is due to in subject stent stenosis, but patient did have atherosclerosis in the parent vessel artery.It was noted that there was parent vessel stenosis prior to treatment on the proximal end of the aneurysm.No more information is available.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
It was reported that the subject flow diverter stent was implanted in the cavernous segment of the internal carotid artery on (b)(6)2021.Nine months post procedure during routine follow-up angiogram was performed which reveled hundred percent stenosis of the patient's internal carotid artery and the subject flow diverter stent.There was no blood flow distal to the stenosis.It was reported that the patient was asymptomatic.It was reported that the subject flow diverter stent performed as intended during deployment.According to the physician the stenosis of the parent vessel artery is due to in subject stent stenosis, but patient did have atherosclerosis in the parent vessel artery.It was noted that there was parent vessel stenosis prior to treatment on the proximal end of the aneurysm.No more information is available.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
Although the dhr could not be reviewed because the lot number remains unknown, due to the automated mes system there are controls in the manufacturing process to ensure the product met specifications upon release.The subject device is not available; therefore, functional testing as well as visual testing cannot be performed.The reported event is covered in the device directions for use (dfu).As well, the risk of the reported event is documented in the risk documentation and there are current controls to mitigate the risk of the as reported event.The reported complaint could not be confirmed, and it could not be definitively determined if the device failed to meet specifications because the product was not returned.Additional information provided by the customer indicated there were no anomalies noted to the device prior to use and the device was prepared as per the dfu.The devices performed as intended during deployment.There were no difficulties encountered during the procedure that could have contributed to reported issue.In the physician¿s opinion, the stenosis was related to the subject device.Based upon medical review, the harm observed in this complaint is anticipated in nature as per the device risk assessment.As a product related root cause does not apply and the issue is due to a known physiological effect of the procedure and/or patient condition noted within the dfu, product labeling and/or risk documentation files, an assignable cause of anticipated procedural complication will be assigned to the reported 'patient parent vessel stenosis¿ for this complaint.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|