|
It was reported that the procedure was performed to treat a perforation in the left anterior descending (lad).The 2.80x19mm graftmaster was attempted to be released but failed to deploy; therefore, another 2.80x26 mm graftmaster stent was used in an attempted to seal the perforation but the same issue occurred.The patient was sent to cardiac surgery; however, the patient expired.No additional information was provided.
|
|
The device was not returned for analysis.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 incidents.The investigation determined the reported failure to advance appears to be related to the operational context of the procedure.A conclusive cause for the reported patient effect of unrelated death, and the relationship to the product, if any, cannot be determined.The reported patient effect of death, as listed in the graftmasters rx coronary stent graft system, instructions for use (ifu) is a known patient effect that may be associated with use of a coronary stent in native coronary arteries.Per the physician's opinion, both graftmasters did not cause or contribute to the patient's death as the patient was already declining to death, prior to the advancements of the graftmasters.There is no indication of a product quality issue with respect to manufacture, design, or labeling.Medical review conclusion as follows: it can be definitively stated that neither of the graftmaster stents was the direct nor an indirect cause of death for this patient.It was reported that the patient was declining for some time prior to the graftmaster attempts.The patient expired during open heart surgery; the official cause of death was not reported.The most likely cause of this patient's death can be attributed to their advanced age, cardiac presentation, coronary artery perforation, the known complications that accompany perforations, the failure to cross due to the patient's anatomy, and the high mortality rate that accompanies cardiac surgery in this type of case presentation.B2: required intervention was removed and other serious was added.H1: death removed and serious injury added h6: codes 1802, 4624, 4454 removed.
|
|
Subsequently, after the initial was filed.It was noted that after the perforation of the mid lad was was observed resulting in tamponade.A pericardial drain was placed emergently.The patient remained unstable with intermittent pulseless electrical activity (pea) and received shocks for ventricular fibrillation in addition, to advance cardiovascular life support (acls) and high dose pressors/inotropes.Balloon tamponade did not seal the perforation and both graftmasters could not be delivered due to anatomy.Open cardiac surgery was attempted; however, patient expired on the table.Per the physician's opinion both graftmasters did not cause or contribute to patient's death as the patient's was already declining to death, prior to the advancements of the graftmasters.No additional information was provided.
|