|
Date of implant - d6a - added.Suspect medical device - gtin - d4 - corrected from '(b)(4)'.Pma/510(k) - g4 - corrected from 'p170024/s003' to 'p170024'.Due to the automated mes (manufacturing execution system) system there are controls in the manufacturing process to ensure the product met specifications upon release.The subject device was not available; therefore, a visual inspection as well as a functional evaluation could not 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 stated that ' during a diagnostic appointment when the patient came back, it was noticed that there was mal apprehension on proximal stent'.No surgical delay and no medical intervention were reported.There was an adverse consequence to the patient, ¿90% fish-mouthing was observed on the proximal end of the stent during the follow-up¿.The patient was discharged home.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 as reported 'patient parent vessel stenosis¿.
|