| Model Number |
IMP-FX-12 |
| Medical Device Problem Code |
Malposition of Device (2616)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Code |
No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions (4582)
|
| Date of Event |
10/24/2024
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Malfunction
|
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
Patient was treated for type ii endoleak on 09/23/2024 using 70 impede-fx devices (imp-fx-12) after being diagnosed with type ii endoleak and expanding aorta.The procedure was completed without any reported incidents.During the 30 day follow up scan on 10/24/2024, it was noticed that some of the devices appear to be located in or on the aortic wall and between the thrombus and the aortic wall.The patient status was stable and no serious adverse event was reported.No further re-intervention was performed.The physician scheduled the patient for follow up appointments to continue to monitor.Lot numbers of imp-fx-12 device used: lot#fr24041101u, qty: 44, exp date: 2027-08-06, manufacturing date: 05/06/2024; lot#fr24062810u qty: 10, exp date: 2027-10-15, manufacturing date: 07/15/2024; lot#fr24040501u qty: 11, exp date: 2027-07-23 manufacturing date: 04/23/2024; lot#fr24062501u qty: 5, exp date: 2027-09-28 manufacturing date: 06/28/2024.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
Patient was treated for type ii endoleak after being diagnosed with type ii endoleak and expanding aorta.70 imp-fx-12 devices were implanted in the patient on (b)(6) 2024 and no incidents were reported.During the 30 day follow up scan on (b)(6) 2024, the physician noticed that some of the devices appear to be on or in the aortic wall and between the thrombus and the aortic wall and smm was notified about this complaint.No other serious adverse events to patient were reported and the physician scheduled follow up appointments to continue monitoring the patient.Case images were received for smm's review.Upon review of the intra-op images and follow up ct scans, it is possible that the devices were originally implanted within the aortic wall due to the access catheter being positioned within the wall and thereby was not spread out in the sac as intended.In this case, the unexpected positioning observed at the 30 day follow up would not be a result of migration or movement of the plug but of access or malpositioning during the original procedure.However, without additional information, a root cause could not be definitively confirmed in this case.The 30 day follow up scans confirmed that there were no plugs outside the aortic sac.Additionally, there was no malfunction of the device reported during the procedure.Furthermore, manufacturing documentation of imp-fx-12 devices used in this procedure were reviewed and no findings were made that could be attributed to this incident.Shape memory medical complaint reference number: (b)(4).
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|
|