| Model Number |
VAMC3232C150TU |
| Medical Device Problem Code |
Material Deformation (2976)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Code |
No Consequences Or Impact To Patient (2199)
|
| Date of Event |
11/21/2016
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Malfunction
|
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
Film evaluation summary: the exact cause of the reported inadvertently implanting the closed web valiant stent (distal component) as the proximal stent graft could not be conclusively determined from the two images provided.However, it was most likely user related.The exact cause of the proximal stent graft not apposing to the aorta along the inner curvature of the aortic arch (bird beaking) could not be conclusively determined from the two still angio images provided.Additional films during the implant procedure were not provided.The image provided showed that the aortic arch was steeply angulated ~ 90 deg.It is possible that implanting the closed web valiant stent graft as the most proximal device (not following ifu) in an angulated descending thoracic aorta may have contributed.(b)(4).A good faith effort will be made to obtain the applicable information relevant to the report.If information is provided in the future, a supplemental report will be issued.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
A valiant captivia stent graft system was implanted in a patient for the endovascular treatment of an emergent thoracic aortic blunt force focal transaction transection.It was reported that a distal main was inadvertently implanted instead of a proximal main.It was noted that an assortment of devices were pulled to treat this patient.After ivus imaging a 32x32x150 valiant stent graft was decided upon.The staff reportedly pulled the distal main device by mistake and it was not noticed until the device was partially deployed.There was some slight bird beaking of the device due to the steep aortic angle of the aortic arch; but the device itself was placed perfectly distal to the left subclavian as planned.It was decided to leave the device as is and not extend proximally any further; as the angiogram showed that the transection was successfully excluded and the event had resolved.The cause of the event was noted as user error.No additional clinical sequelae were reported and the patient is fine.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
Corrected information: sex, date of birth.If information is provided in the future, a supplemental report will be issued.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|