| Model Number |
3241 |
| Medical Device Problem Code |
Adverse Event Without Identified Device or Use Problem (2993)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Codes |
Cardiac Arrest (1762); Cardiac Tamponade (2226); Cardiogenic Shock (2262)
|
| Date of Event |
12/03/2023
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Death
|
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
It was reported that a patient death occurred.The patient presented for a complex left main to left anterior descending artery (lad) crossover procedure.It was noted that the left main was severely tortuous and heavily calcified.A 1.75mm rotalink rotablator plus was used for two runs of 11 seconds to ablate the calcium, then a wolverine 3.0 x 10mm and a synergy 3.0 x 32mm were used to treat the lesion; both were inflated at 11 atm.Afterwards, angio revealed timi3 flow without any dissection.After angio, however, the patient went into cardiac arrest and was immediately moved for emergency coronary artery bypass graft surgery.The patient passed away the next day due to cardiac tamponade which led to cardiogenic shock.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
It was reported that a patient death occurred.The patient presented for a complex left main to left anterior descending artery (lad) crossover procedure.It was noted that the left main was severely tortuous and heavily calcified.A 1.75mm rotalink rotablator plus was used for two runs of 11 seconds to ablate the calcium, then a wolverine 3.0 x 10mm and a synergy 3.0 x 32mm were used to treat the lesion; both were inflated at 11 atm.Afterwards, angio revealed timi3 flow without any dissection.After angio, however, the patient went into cardiac arrest and was immediately moved for emergency coronary artery bypass graft surgery.The patient passed away the next day due to cardiac tamponade which led to cardiogenic shock.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
The returned product consisted of the rotablator atherectomy system.A visual inspection of the device revealed that the coil was kinked and stretched at the handshake connection.When put through a functional test, the device would stall and not run.Destructive testing was done along with microscopic examination.This revealed that the shutter was damaged which could lead to fiberoptic interference.Design assurance and cork supplier quality were contacted regarding the shutter damage, and it was verified that the shutter damage present was likely due to a molding defect from the supplier.Based on a thorough review of the reported complaint, the most probable cause for this complaint was considered known inherent risk of device.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|