| Model Number |
4542 |
| Medical Device Problem Code |
High impedance (1291)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Code |
No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions (4582)
|
| Date of Event |
05/26/2026
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Serious Injury
|
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
If pertinent information is provided in the future, a supplemental report will be submitted.This product investigation is still in progress.This report will be updated when product investigation is complete.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
It was reported that this left ventricular (lv) lead exhibited a high out of range pacing impedance, greater than 3000 ohms.It was noted the patient had some other medical issues.No lv vectors were viable, subsequently, this lv lead was programmed off.This lv lead remains in situ.No additional adverse patient effects were reported.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
It was reported that this left ventricular (lv) lead exhibited a high out of range pacing impedance, greater than 3000 ohms.It was noted the patient had some other medical issues.No lv vectors were viable, subsequently, this lv lead was programmed off.This lv lead remains in situ.No additional adverse patient effects were reported.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
It was reported that this left ventricular (lv) lead exhibited a high out of range pacing impedance, greater than 3000 ohms.It was noted the patient had some other medical issues.No lv vectors were viable, subsequently, this lv lead was programmed off.This lv lead remains in situ.No additional adverse patient effects were reported.Additional information was received.This lead was surgically abandoned and replaced.No additional adverse patient effects were reported.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
Device technical analysis: this product has not been returned to boston scientific, and as a result, a laboratory analysis could not be conducted.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 pacing impedance high out of range 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 to labeling.The manual was unlikely to be the cause of the reported complaint; translation, wording, or graphics does not require further review.Investigation conclusion: based on a thorough review of the reported complaint, boston scientific has assigned an investigation conclusion code of cause not established.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
Additional information added to b5.F10 and h6 updated.Device technical analysis: this product has not been returned to boston scientific, and as a result, a laboratory analysis could not be conducted.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 pacing impedance high out of range 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 to labeling.The manual was unlikely to be the cause of the reported complaint; translation, wording, or graphics does not require further review.Investigation conclusion: based on a thorough review of the reported complaint, boston scientific has assigned an investigation conclusion code of cause not established.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|