|
During the procedure, the physician attempted to cross a stenotic area using a 6-45 ansel sheath; however, this was unsuccessful via the initial approach.Alternate access was obtained via the left external approach, and the stenosis in the proximal left common iliac artery was successfully crossed using an amplatz wire.An icast stent was advanced but became dislodged from the balloon prior to deployment.The dislodged stent was successfully snared and retrieved.Shockwave therapy was then performed to treat the stenosis, and no stent was implanted.The sheath and dislodged stent were removed from the patient.No harm was reported.
|
|
Additional information section: h6\
\
the manufacturer conducted an investigation into a reported stent dislodgement during an iliac artery intervention.Review of the available information indicates that the icast covered stent dislodged from the balloon catheter during attempted delivery across a >50% stenosed left common iliac lesion.The lesion was not pre-dilated and required manipulation of the device to advance.The dislodged stent remained on the guidewire and was successfully retrieved using a snare, and the procedure was completed with alternative therapy (shockwave) without stent placement.\
\
a device history record (dhr) review for the associated lot (526093) confirmed that all manufacturing, assembly, and inspection requirements were met, with no nonconformances impacting product quality.Performance and functional testing, including stent retention, met specifications, and no abnormalities were identified.\
\
risk management documentation confirms that this type of event (difficulty delivering stent and potential dislodgement in heavily stenosed calcified lesions) is a known and documented hazard with appropriate labeling warnings.\
\
no corrective or preventive actions were deemed necessary.Complaint trending remains within expected limits, and no new risks or failure modes were identified.\
\
the complaint device was not returned, and no procedural images were provided therefore, the reported event could not be confirmed through physical examination.\
\
based on the investigation, there is no evidence of device malfunction or manufacturing deficiency.The root cause of the event is attributed to user operational factors and patient anatomy, specifically a tight, partially calcified stenosis, lack of lesion pre-dilation, and manipulation of the device during attempted delivery.
|