|
A visual inspection and dimensional analysis were performed on the returned device.The reported stent damage was confirmed.The reported failure to advance and difficult to insert was not tested due to the condition of the retuned device.Production record and corrective and preventative actions (capa) reviews were performed and revealed no indication of a product quality issue.Additionally, a query of the complaint handling database for the reported lot revealed there is no indication of a lot specific issue.It was reported that the omnilink elite could not cross the previously implanted stent.It should be noted that the omnilink elite instructions for use (ifu), states: ¿when treating multiple lesions, the distal lesion should be initially stented, followed by stenting of the proximal lesion.Stenting in this order obviates the need to cross the proximal stent in placement of the distal stent and reduces the chances for dislodging the proximal stent.¿ in this case, it is unknown the ifu deviation contributed to the reported event.In this case, based on the reported information and evaluation of the returned device, the reported failure to advance appears to be due to interaction with the previously implanted stent while trying to advance distal to the stent.It is likely that after the failed attempt to cross the previously implanted stent, damage to the stent struts occurred causing resistance during the attempt to readvance the stent delivery system (sds) through the sheath.Based on the results of the complaint investigation there is no indication of a product quality issue with respect to the design, manufacture, or labeling of the device.
|