|
A visual inspection was performed on the returned device.The reported stent dislodgement was confirmed.The reported difficult to advance could not be tested due to the condition of the returned device.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 stent, a definitive cause for the reported difficulties could not be determined; however, 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, interaction with patent anatomy or accessory devices.Factors that could contribute to difficult to advance include, but are not limited to, patient anatomical morphology, inner lumen obstruction, patient disease state, pre-dilatation strategy, device placement technique, interaction with previously placed stents or accessory devices.In this case, it is possible the device may have interacted with accessory devices (rotating hemostatic valve) during insertion/advancement, as resistance was noted, causing the reported difficult to advance, ultimately contributing to the reported stent dislodgement; however, based on the information provided and analysis of the returned device, this cannot be confirmed.The dislodged stent was simply removed from the rhv and another xience skypoint stent was used to complete the procedure.There was no adverse patient effect and there was no clinically significant delay in the procedure.
|