|
It was reported that a patient experienced a cardiac tamponade requiring a pericardiocentesis and extended hospitalization.A farapulse procedure was performed and completed on (b)(6) 2026.A versacross connect for faradrive was used for the transeptal puncture portion of the procedure.The faradrive sheath and a farawave catheter were used with a merit guidewire for the ablation portion of the procedure.Following the completion of the procedure, the patient reported shortness of breath and chest pain.The physician ordered an echocardiography and observed a cardiac tamponade.A pericardiocentesis was performed, removing 300 cc of fluid.The patient was hospitalized.The physician reported that the patient had a small right inferior pulmonary vein and a small heart.The patient was finally discharged on 06aug2026.All symptoms are absent and patient is in normal sinus rhythm.
|
|
D2a: common device name: percutaneous cardiac ablation catheter for treatment of atrial fibrillation with irreversible electroporation; reported here as the common device name exceeded the character limit for designated field.Investigation summary
with all the available information, boston scientific is unable to confirm cause of the reported clinical observation of e0605 cardiac tamponade, e233001 chest pain, e0743 respiratory insufficiency, and e2311 discomfort.The device has not been received for analysis; therefore, a technical analysis of the complaint device could not be completed.Device history record review
it was confirmed this device met specification prior to distribution and there were no manufacturing deviations which could have contributed to the reported event.Labeling review
based on the information provided, there is no evidence that the device was used in a manner inconsistent with the labelled indications/instructions for use (ifu).Risk review
a risk review performed for the farawave device confirmed that the events of e0605 cardiac tamponade, e233001 chest pain, e0743 respiratory insufficiency, and e2311 discomfort are known events defined in the product risk management documentation.These event types have been accounted for during product risk analysis to support acceptable risk benefit for the product.Investigation conclusion
boston scientific has assigned an investigation conclusion code of cause not established and supporting evidence that came to this conclusion.Boston scientifics investigation findings were unable to establish a clear conclusion about the cause of the reported event.No device-related allegations were identified for this complaint.The device met all requirements prior to being approved for final distribution/sale and there was no evidence to suggest that the instructions for use (ifu) was not followed.
|