|
It was reported that the procedure was to treat a bifurcation of a lesion in the anterior intraventricular artery (iva) and diagonal artery with moderate calcification and no tortuosity.The 2.5x12mm nc trek balloon dilatation catheter (bdc) was used successfully in the diagonal artery and removed without resistance.The xience skypoint stent was implanted successfully in the left anterior descending (lad) artery.The nc trek balloon was advanced again in the lad but without inflation.Another 2.75x12mm xience skypoint stent delivery system (sds) was attempted to be advanced but had resistance with the guiding catheter.The sds was removed, however, the stent dislodged in the guiding catheter.The stent was removed together with the guide catheter.The nc trek bdc was then removed without resistance but the distal shaft separated and a portion remained in the lad.Surgery had to be performed to retrieve the separated portion.There was no adverse patient sequelae.There was a clinically significant delay in the procedure and there was prolonged hospitalization.No additional information was provided.
|
|
A visual inspection was performed on the returned device.The reported separation was confirmed.A review of the lot history record identified no manufacturing nonconformities issued to the reported lot that would have contributed to this event.Additionally, a review of the complaint history identified no other similar incidents and or complaints from this lot.The investigation determined the reported separation, surgical intervention, delay in treatment therapy and hospitalization appear to be related to operational context.There was no damage noted to the balloon catheter prior to use, during preparation or during initial successful use in the diagonal artery, which suggests a product quality issue did not contribute to the reported difficulty.Return analysis noted that the material at the noted shaft separation was stretched and jagged which suggests that the separation may be related to tensile overload (material stress/fatigue).In this case, it is likely that, although no resistance was reported during removal, the bdc interacted with the other devices and/or patient anatomy, resulting in tensile overload (material stress/fatigue) during removal, such that the shaft separated.There is no indication of a product quality issue with respects to the design, manufacture, or labeling of the device.Na.
|