| Model Number |
7732 |
| Medical Device Problem Codes |
Signal Artifact/Noise (1036); Fracture (1260); High impedance (1291)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Code |
No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions (4582)
|
| Date of Event |
12/18/2025
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Serious Injury
|
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
It was reported that during a routine checkup, this right ventricular (rv) lead exhibited high out of range pacing impedance measurements which triggered a lead safety switch (lss) to unipolar pacing.The patient was sent to the emergency room (er) and there was noise present on the rv lead in both unipolar and bipolar pacing.Additionally, the lead was believed to be fractured.This rv lead was surgically abandoned, and no additional adverse patient effects were reported.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
If pertinent information is provided in the future, a supplemental report will be submitted.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
It was reported that during a routine checkup, this right ventricular (rv) lead exhibited high out of range pacing impedance measurements which triggered a lead safety switch (lss) to unipolar pacing.The patient was sent to the emergency room (er) and there was noise present on the rv lead in both unipolar and bipolar pacing.Additionally, the lead was believed to be fractured.This rv lead was surgically abandoned, and no additional adverse patient effects were reported.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
This device was surgically abandoned and was not returned.As such, physical analysis has not been conducted in our laboratory.Based on the available information, and in the absence of a product return, the investigation conclusion code cause not established was selected.As no further information concerning this report is expected, our investigation is complete.This investigation will be updated should further information be provided.A review of the device history record (dhr) was performed.The review of the dhr identified that there were no process related non-conformances, scrap, or rework performed during the production that could explain the event.The reviews ensure each device meets specification prior to release for use.There is no indication the device manufacturing process contributed to the reported complaint.A risk review was completed and confirmed that the event of fracture was defined in the risk documentation.This event type has been accounted for during product risk analysis to support acceptable risk benefit for the product.Review of labeling determined that the complaint situation was listed in the manual.There was no indication in the complaint that the product was not used in accordance with labeling.The manual was unlikely to be the cause of the reported complaint; translation, wording, or graphics does not require further review.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|