|
It was reported that on (b)(6) 2025, a 20 mm amplatzer amulet device was implanted using a 12f amplatzer amulet delivery sheath in a female patient with windsock anatomy.The landing zone was measured at 16 x 20 mm on computed tomography (ct) imaging.The patient was in sinus rhythm during the procedure.Device sizing was determined using ct, transesophageal echocardiography (tee), and angiography.The patient was in sinus rhythm during the procedure.Tee and angiography were used as imaging modalities during the procedure.The device initially appeared to be well positioned within the left atrial appendage, with the entire lobe inside the circumflex region and all closure criteria fulfilled.The device was in a tire shape at the time of implant, and no leak was detected around the lobe.A short tug test was performed to confirm stability.However, after release from the delivery cable, the device changed position.On tee and angiography, part of the lobe was seen protruding into the atrium, indicating migration.The physician attempted to retrieve the device using a snare, but the attempt was unsuccessful.The device shifted position within the intended implant site when released and embolized during the snaring attempt, eventually migrating into the ventricle.The implanter believed the cause of migration was sinus rhythm, as the device appeared well positioned at a 45° tee view but was seen protruding into the atrium at a 145° view.There was no difficulty with implanting the device, and no multiple recaptures or repositioning were required.Fluid administration included 500 ml of nacl at the start of the procedure.The patient was referred for surgical intervention.The procedure was performed under general anesthesia.After migration into the ventricle, the surgeon was consulted, and since the patient remained stable, surgery was scheduled for the next day.The operation was successful, with the device retrieved and the appendage closed by the surgeons.
|
|
An event of migration or expulsion of device was reported.A returned device assessment could not be performed as the device was not returned for analysis.The device history record was reviewed to ensure that each manufacturing and inspection operation was performed, and the product met all defined manufacturing specifications.There were no complaints associated with any other devices from the lot.Based on the available information, the cause for the reported migration or expulsion of device could not be determined.Interventions were a result of case-specific circumstances, as an attempt to snare the device was unsuccessful and the device was removed surgically.There is no indication of a product quality issue with respect to labeling design or manufacturing of the device.
|