|
It was reported that this implantable cardioverter defibrillator (icd) exhibited high out of range pace impedance measurements.Technical services (ts) was consulted and reviewed historical measurements, noting they previously remained stable.Ts reviewed the presenting electrogram and saw no noise and no stored events with the exception of threshold testing.Ts suggested an in clinic evaluation of isometrics and pocket manipulation to check for noise.If no noise was produced and measurements were within normal limits, ts recommended to continue monitoring.No adverse patient effects were reported.This icd remains in service.
|
|
This product has not been returned to boston scientific, and as a result, laboratory analysis could not be conducted.The associated investigation determined that this device exhibited intermittent changes in impedance measurements with no conclusive evidence of a product performance issue or inadequate lead-to-device connection; please refer to the description for more information regarding the specific circumstances of this event.Engineering analysis and testing of returned products has determined that repeated, small movements of the lead terminal ring along with variances in the connection contact force and surface roughness can impact the connection between the spring contact and the lead ring, resulting in intermittent changes in impedance measurement.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.Based on a thorough review of the reported complaint, boston scientific has assigned an investigation conclusion code of cause traced to device design.
|