|
Clinical narrative:
product/patient demographics/indication/baseline presentation:
an impella 5.5 with smartassist (sa) was inserted via the right axillary/subclavian artery in a 65-year-old male weighing 87 kg who presented with acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock.The patient's medical history was significant for coronary artery disease, cardiac arrest, and prior cardiopulmonary resuscitation (cpr).The patient's clinical condition prior to initiation of support was society for cardiovascular angiography and interventions (scai) shock stage d.Stage d patients demonstrate worsening shock despite initial treatment with progressive hemodynamic compromise and evidence of multiorgan dysfunction.Prior to device implantation, the patient was supported with inotropes, vasopressors, and respiratory support.The patient was also receiving impella rp flex with smartassist (sa) support as part of bipella support.Device course & treatment:
on day 3 of impella 5.5 smartassist support, suboptimal waveforms and reduced flows were reported from the impella 5.5 with smartassist.An echocardiogram was requested to further assess device position and function.Following echocardiographic assessment, the physician attempted to reposition the impella 5.5 with smartassist, at which time the device reportedly advanced across the aortic valve into the aorta.The patient subsequently required emergent venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (va-ecmo) support for hemodynamic stabilization.Once stabilized, the plan was to return the patient to the cardiovascular operating room for placement of a replacement impella 5.5 with smartassist device.No additional alarms or device malfunction was reported.The patient survived to device explant.Additional factors:
the patient's acute myocardial infarction, cardiogenic shock, history of cardiac arrest requiring cardiopulmonary resuscitation, and need for concurrent bipella support represent significant contributing factors to the patient's overall clinical condition.The requirement for emergent venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (va-ecmo) further reflects the severity of the patient's hemodynamic compromise.The patient was receiving concomitant impella rp flex with smartassist support; however, no information was reported indicating that the rp flex sa contributed to the reported event.Device contribution:
based on the available information, the impella 5.5 with smartassist was reported to have advanced across the aortic valve into the aorta during an attempted repositioning procedure performed following echocardiographic evaluation for suboptimal waveforms and reduced flow.The patient subsequently required emergent venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (va-ecmo) support and later underwent replacement of the impella 5.5 with smartassist.Device malfunctions, alarms, or failures were not reported.Based on the available information, the impella 5.5 with smartassist and the associated repositioning procedure are considered contributing factors to the reported device malposition event requiring escalation of mechanical circulatory support and device replacement.
|
|
This report is being submitted pursuant to the provisions of 21 cfr, part 803.This report may be based on information which has not been investigated or verified prior to the required reporting date.This report does not reflect a conclusion by abiomed inc, or its employees that the report constitutes an admission that the product, abiomed inc, or its employees caused or contributed to the potential event described in this report.If information is obtained that was not available for the initial report, a follow-up report will be filed as appropriate.
|