|
The device was not returned for analysis.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.A conclusive cause for the reported device damaged by another device could not be determined; however, the subsequent surgical intervention appears to be related to the operational context of the procedure.Device damaged by another device may be attributed to several factors including, but are not limited to, lesion inadequately predilated, lesion selection (not treating the distal lesion first), interaction between accessory devices or previously implanted stents.In this case, it is possible that the guide wire may have interacted with the previously implanted stent, which was explanted and became located in the patient's right brachial artery, causing the reported device damaged by another device; however, this cannot be confirmed.Based on the results of the complaint investigation, there is no indication of a product quality issue with respect to the design, manufacture, or labeling of the device.
|
|
It was reported that the procedure performed was to treat a de novo, heavily calcified, heavily tortuous left anterior descending coronary artery.The 3.50 x 33 mm xience skypoint drug-eluting stent (des) was implanted.Upon removal of an unspecified guide wire in a secondary branch, the des was explanted and located in the patient's right brachial artery.A 3.5 x 38 mm xience des was implanted in the lad to replace the explanted stent.The patient was currently admitted and heparinized overnight.The following day ((b)(6) 2026), the patient underwent a cutdown and the 3.50 x 33 mm des was successfully removed.No additional information was provided.
|