• Decrease font size
  • Return font size to normal
  • Increase font size
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services

MAUDE Adverse Event Report: CYBERONICS, INC. LEAD MODEL 302

  • Print
  • Share
  • E-mail
-
Super Search Devices@FDA
510(k) | DeNovo | Registration & Listing | Adverse Events | Recalls | PMA | HDE | Classification | Standards
CFR Title 21 | Radiation-Emitting Products | X-Ray Assembler | Medsun Reports | CLIA | TPLC
 

CYBERONICS, INC. LEAD MODEL 302 Back to Search Results
Model Number 302-20
Device Problem Break (1069)
Patient Problem No Code Available (3191)
Event Date 12/31/2014
Event Type  malfunction  
Manufacturer Narrative
 
Event Description
It was reported that patient underwent full vns system revision surgery on (b)(6) 2016 due to lead discontinuity and prophylactic replacement for the generator.The explanted products were received by the manufacturer.Analysis of the devices is underway, but it has not been completed to date.
 
Event Description
Additional information was received that the high impedance was first noticed on follow up visit on (b)(6) 2015.Patient was complaining of tingling and itching in the chest around the site of the generator.On initial interrogation, the lead impedance was 9666 ohms.Nurse switched off the stimulator and the itching and discomfort in the chest abated very quickly.The explanted lead only was received and analyzed.During analysis, lead fracture was verified.The outer and inner silicone tubing (positive coil) are punctured open most likely by an electro-cautery tool.Though difficult to state conclusively it is believed that this was most likely caused at explant.Scanning electron microscopy images of the positive coil show that pitting or electro-etching conditions have occurred at the break location.However, due to metal dissolution and mechanical distortion (smoothed surfaces) the fracture mechanism cannot be ascertained.Also, one strand of the positive coil shows appearance suggesting that the coil was exposed to some type of electro-cautery tool (most likely at explant).Since the closest electrode to the bifurcation was not returned for analysis, an evaluation and resulting commentary cannot be made on that portion of the lead.Other than the above mentioned observations and typical wear and explant related observations, no other anomalies were identified in the returned lead portions.
 
Event Description
The explanted generator was analyzed by the manufacturer.Review of the data downloaded from the pulse generator shows a possible indication of increased impedance; the ¿diagvinitialprechange¿ value of 2631 ohms, the ¿diagvinitialpostchange¿ value of 9298 ohms, and the time of change detection (b)(6) 2014 (explant (b)(6) 2016).Various electrical loads were attached to the pulse generator and results of diagnostic tests demonstrate that accurate resistance measurements were obtained in all instances.Proper functionality of the pulse generator in its ability to provide appropriate programmed output currents can be verified.In addition, the septum was not cored, thus eliminating the possibility of a potential unintended electrical current path through body fluids.This was successfully verified during the analysis.In the pa lab, the device output signal was monitored for more than 24-hrs, while the pulse generator was placed in a simulated body temperature environment.Results showed no signs of variation in the pulse generator¿s output signal and demonstrated that the device provided the expected level of output current for the entire monitoring period.The pulse generator diagnostics were as expected for the programmed parameters.In addition, a comprehensive automated electrical evaluation showed that the pulse generator performed according to functional specifications.The battery, 2.988 volts as measured during completion of test parameter, shows an ifi=no condition.The data in the diagaccumconsumed memory locations revealed that 52.641% of the battery had been consumed.Measured battery voltage and consumed capacity parameters are as expected.There were no performance or any other type of adverse conditions found with the pulse generator.
 
Search Alerts/Recalls

  New Search  |  Submit an Adverse Event Report

Brand Name
LEAD MODEL 302
Type of Device
LEAD
Manufacturer (Section D)
CYBERONICS, INC.
100 cyberonics blvd
houston TX 77058
Manufacturer (Section G)
CYBERONICS, INC.
100 cyberonics blvd
suite 600
houston TX 77058
Manufacturer Contact
njemile crawley
100 cyberonics blvd
suite 600
houston, TX 77058
2812287200
MDR Report Key5719983
MDR Text Key48204080
Report Number1644487-2016-01320
Device Sequence Number1
Product Code LYJ
Combination Product (y/n)N
PMA/PMN Number
P970003
Number of Events Reported1
Summary Report (Y/N)N
Report Source Manufacturer
Source Type company representative,foreig
Reporter Occupation Physician
Type of Report Initial,Followup,Followup
Report Date 05/17/2016
1 Device was Involved in the Event
1 Patient was Involved in the Event
Is this an Adverse Event Report? No
Is this a Product Problem Report? Yes
Device Operator Lay User/Patient
Device Expiration Date11/30/2013
Device Model Number302-20
Device Lot Number2506
Was Device Available for Evaluation? Device Returned to Manufacturer
Date Returned to Manufacturer06/07/2016
Is the Reporter a Health Professional? Yes
Event Location Other
Initial Date Manufacturer Received 05/17/2016
Initial Date FDA Received06/13/2016
Supplement Dates Manufacturer ReceivedNot provided
Not provided
Supplement Dates FDA Received07/01/2016
07/11/2016
Was Device Evaluated by Manufacturer? No
Date Device Manufactured11/05/2009
Is the Device Single Use? Yes
Is This a Reprocessed and Reused Single-Use Device? No
Type of Device Usage Initial
Patient Sequence Number1
Patient Age24 YR
-
-