|
The device was not returned for analysis.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.Based on the information provided and without the device to examine, a definitive cause for the reported difficulties could not be determined; however, the subsequent unexpected medical intervention appears to be related to circumstances of the procedure.Factors that may contribute to material ruptures include, but are not limited to, material damage, inflation technique, interactions with other devices, lesion calcification and tortuosity or insufficient preparation prior to use.Difficulty deploying the stent (difficult or delayed activation) may be attributed to several factors including, but are not limited to, stent placement, patient anatomical morphology (calcification, tortuosity), inflation technique during use of the product or undersizing of the vessel.In this case, it is possible that the device may have interacted with the moderately calcified lesion during advancement/positioning, causing the reported material rupture which ultimately contributed to the reported difficult or delayed activation; however, based on the information received and without the device to examine, a conclusive cause cannot be confirmed.The stent was under expanded.A 6.0 armada balloon was advanced and used to fully expand the stent.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.D9 correction: device available for evaluation updated from yes to no.
|