|
The publication describes multiple serious injury events summarized in aggregate form without complete patient-level detail.Therefore, the manufacturer is submitting a consolidated literature-based mdr representing the serious injury event type described in the article.Study: study: capocasale, e., larini, p., mazzoni, m.P., marcato, c., valle, r.D., busi, n., monaco, d., benozzi, l., & sianesi, m.(2005).Percutaneous renal artery embolization of nonfunctioning allograft: preliminary experience.Transplantation proceedings, 37(6), 2523-2524.Https://doi.Org/10.1016/j.Transproceed.2005.06.016 was reviewed during internal quality system activities.The publication describes that the microspheres used in percutaneous renal artery embolization (prae) procedures have been associated with hematuria, and septic fever.Echocolor doppler and clinical evaluation was scheduled at discharge and repeated at the 1, 3, 6, and 12 months follow-up.Immediate technical success was achieved in all cases; no complications occurred.In 3 cases, complete resolution of the syndrome was obtained.One patient with persisting hematuria underwent angiography that disclosed a perirenal collateral circulation originating from a lumbar artery, which was successfully embolized.One patient underwent a transplant nephrectomy because of septic fever.A post-embolization syndrome of fever and graft pain was observed in 2 of the 5 cases but resolved spontaneously in 3-4 days.The average hospital stay was 6 days.At 12 months follow-up, echocolor doppler showed the same size of the kidney in 3 cases, a 30% reduction in bipolar diameter in 1, and absence of flow in all cases.
|
|
This event was identified during internal quality system activities involving retrospective review of literature sources.Upon review, the manufacturer determined the event meets applicable medical device reporting criteria and is submitting this report to ensure completeness of complaint and mdr documentation.This submission does not represent new information regarding device performance or a change in the known risk profile of the device.The suspect device was not returned for evaluation.Device lot information was not available from the publication; therefore, a review of manufacturing records and complaint trending specific to the device lot could not be performed.Based on the information available from the literature source, the complaint could not be confirmed, and a definitive root cause could not be determined.
|