|
It was reported that the procedure was to treat a moderately calcified, heavily tortuous right coronary artery.The 3.0x28mm xience skypoint stent delivery system (sds) failed to cross due to anatomy and the stent was observed to become flared.A 3.0x23mm xience skypoint sds was attempted to be advanced; however, failed to cross due to anatomy and was removed.The stent was observed to flared.Therefore, a 3.0x15mm xience skypoint stent was advanced and implanted in the distal lesion; however, the stent moved from the lesion site and was removed from the anatomy with a balloon.A new unspecified stent was implanted successfully.A 3.0x18mm xience skypoint stent delivery system was attempted to be advanced to treat the proximal portion of the lesion; however, failed to cross due to anatomy and the stent became flared.Therefore, a new 3.0x28mm xience skypoint was attempted to be advanced; however, failed to cross due to anatomy and the stent dislodged.The stent traveled to the aorta of the patient.A snare was used to remove the stent and the lesion was left untreated.There was no adverse patient sequela and clinically significant delay was noted.No additional information was provided.
|
|
A visual inspection was performed on the returned device.The reported stent dislodgement was confirmed.The reported failure to advance could not be evaluated as the exact anatomical conditions encountered by the device used during the procedure could not be replicated in the test laboratory.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 analysis of the returned device, a definitive cause for the reported difficulties could not be determined; however, the subsequent unexpected medical intervention and delay to treatment/therapy appear to be related to the operational context of the procedure.Stent dislodgement may be attributed to several factors including, but not limited to, positive pressure during preparation, forced sheath removal, handling of the stent during preparation, and interaction with patent anatomy or accessory devices.Factors that could contribute to failure to advance include, but are not limited to, patient anatomical morphology, patient disease state, pre-dilatation strategy, device placement technique, interaction with previously placed stents or accessory devices.In this case, it is possible that the device may have interacted with the moderately calcified, heavily tortuous lesion during advancement, causing the reported failure to advance.Further interaction with the challenging anatomy may have contributed to the reported stent dislodgement; however, this cannot be confirmed.It was reported the stent traveled to the aorta of the patient.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.
|