|
Olympus medical systems corp.(omsc) reviewed a literature titled "transverse versus longitudinal mucosal incision during poem for esophageal motility disorders: a randomized trial".Longitudinal incision is the commonly used incision for entry into the submucosal space during peroral endoscopic myotomy (poem) for esophageal motility disorders.Transverse incision is another alternative for entry and retrospective data suggest it has less operative time and chance of gas-related events.This was a single-center, randomized trial conducted at a (b)(6) hospital.Patients undergoing poem for esophageal motility disorders were randomized into group a (longitudinal incision) and group b (transverse incision).The primary objective was to compare the time needed for entry into the submucosal space.The secondary objectives were to compare the time needed to close the incision, number of clips required to close the incision, and development of gas-related events.The sample size was calculated as for a non-inferiority design using kelsey method.Sixty patients were randomized (30 in each group).On comparing the 2 types of incisions, there was no difference in entry time [3 (2, 5) vs 2 (1.75, 5) min, p = 0.399], closure time [7 (4, 13.5) vs 9 (6.75, 19) min, p = 0.155], and number of clips needed for closure [4 (4, 6) vs 5 (4, 7), p = 0.156].Additionally, the gas-related events were comparable between the 2 groups (capnoperitoneum needing aspiration¿5 vs 2, p = 0.228, and development of subcutaneous emphysema¿3 vs 1, p = 0.301).This randomized trial shows comparable entry time, closure time, number of clips needed to close the incision, and gas-related events between longitudinal and transverse incisions.Type of adverse events/number of patients event1: subcutaneous emphysema ((b)(4) cases).Event2: na for this device.Event3: capnoperitoneum ((b)(4) cases).Most of the adverse events were mild and were tackled during the procedure itself.Capnoperitoneum events required needle aspiration.
|
|
This report is being supplemented to provide additional information based on the legal manufacturer's final investigation.The device history record was unable to be reviewed for this device since the serial and/or lot number was not provided.However, olympus only releases products to market that meet all manufacturing specifications and final product release criteria.Based on the results of the investigation, it is likely that the reported event is an accident, or a complication associated with a procedure using the subject device.There was no complaint reported on the subject device.There is no evidence of an olympus device malfunction.Therefore, the root cause cannot be determined.Olympus will continue to monitor field performance for this device.
|