| Model Number |
M00514250 |
| Medical Device Problem Code |
Break (1069)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Code |
No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions (4582)
|
| Date of Event |
10/01/2025
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Serious Injury
|
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
Block b3: date of event: date of event was approximated to october 01, 2025; as no event date was reported.Block h6: imdrf device code a0406 captures the reportable event of stent break.Imdrf impact code f2202 captures the reportable event of the endoscopic procedure performed to remove the broken stent.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
It was reported to boston scientific corporation that an ultraflex esophageal stent was implanted in the esophagus to treat an unspecified condition during a procedure performed on an unknown date.Reportedly, two weeks after the implant procedure, the stent ruptured inside the patient esophagus.The stent was subsequently explanted.There were no patient complications reported due to this event.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
Block b3: date of event: date of event was approximated to october 01, 2025; as no event date was reported.Block h6: imdrf device code a0406 captures the reportable event of stent break.Imdrf impact code f2202 captures the reportable event of the endoscopic procedure performed to remove the broken stent.Block h11: an ultraflex esophageal stent was returned for analysis.A visual examination of the returned device revealed that the handle was not included in the return.Only the stent was received, and its wires were found broken.No other damages were noted to the stent and delivery system.Product analysis confirmed the reported event of stent break.Taking all available information into consideration, the investigation concluded that the reported event and observed damage were likely due to procedural factors such as lesion characteristics, device handling, and the technique used by the physician, which could have resulted in the damages and wire detachments encountered in the device.Therefore, a review and analysis of all the available information indicated that the most probable cause is adverse event related to procedure.A product labeling review identified that the device was used per the instructions for use (ifu)/product label.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
It was reported to boston scientific corporation that an ultraflex esophageal stent was implanted in the esophagus to treat an unspecified condition during a procedure performed on an unknown date.Reportedly, two weeks after the implant procedure, the stent ruptured inside the patient esophagus.The stent was subsequently explanted.There were no patient complications reported due to this event.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
It was reported to boston scientific corporation that an ultraflex esophageal stent was implanted in the esophagus to treat an unspecified condition during a procedure performed on an unknown date.Reportedly, two weeks after the implant procedure, the stent ruptured inside the patient esophagus.The stent was subsequently explanted.There were no patient complications reported due to this event.Additional information received on november 24, 2025.It was reported that the correct indication for the procedure was an esophageal stricture.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
Block b5 has been updated with additional information received on november 24, 2025.Block b3: date of event: date of event was approximated to october 01, 2025; as no event date was reported.Block h6: imdrf device code a0406 captures the reportable event of stent break.Imdrf impact code f2202 captures the reportable event of the endoscopic procedure performed to remove the broken stent.Block h11: an ultraflex esophageal stent was returned for analysis.A visual examination of the returned device revealed that the handle was not included in the return.Only the stent was received, and its wires were found broken.No other damages were noted to the stent and delivery system.Product analysis confirmed the reported event of stent break.Taking all available information into consideration, the investigation concluded that the reported event and observed damage were likely due to procedural factors such as lesion characteristics, device handling, and the technique used by the physician, which could have resulted in the damages and wire detachments encountered in the device.Therefore, a review and analysis of all the available information indicated that the most probable cause is adverse event related to procedure.A product labeling review identified that the device was used per the instructions for use (ifu)/product label.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|