|
It was reported that the procedure was performed in the mildly calcified lesion in the left anterior descending artery.An assessment of the lesion was performed with the optis next ultreon system to measure the lesion for stenting.The physician used a combination of the oct image and the co-registration image to decide the length of the stent; the tip of the guide catheter was placed just past the distal marker of the imaging catheter during co-registration.The assessment determined that a 23mm length stent was long enough to cover the area of concern.A 3.0x23mm xience skypoint stent was advanced and deployed without issues; however, the stent was too short for the lesion.A second stent was implanted to cover the target lesion.Per the physician, imaging suggested the wrong length stent.There were no adverse patient effects and no reported clinically significant delay in the procedure.No additional information was provided.
|
|
The device was not returned for analysis.A review of the lot history record identified no manufacturing noncomformities issued to the reported lot that would have contributed to this event.Additionally, a review of the complaint history did not indicate a lot specific quality issue.Based on the information available, the root cause of the reported issue was determined to be unrelated to a software issue.From the review of logs, there is no evidence of software issue.However, reviewing the raw data shows at least a 5mm offset from angio co-registration resulting in the frame indicator and reference frames jumping on the angio image as you move across the pullback (for example from frame 293 to 293, and frame 299 to 300).Possible factors such as foreshortening, overlap between vessels, low frame rate, and not capturing cine may have contributed to this issue.There is no indication of a product quality issue with respect to the design, manufacture, or labeling of the device.
|