|
(b)(4).During processing of this complaint, attempts were made to obtain complete event, patient and device information.A visual and dimensional inspection was performed on the returned device.The reported detachment of the device (shaft separation) was confirmed.The reported failure to advance could not be tested as it was based on operational circumstances.A review of the lot history record identified no manufacturing nonconformities issued to the reported lot that would have contributed to this event.Additionally, a review of the complaint history did not indicate a lot specific quality issue.The investigation determined that the reported difficulties appear to be related to circumstances of the procedure.There is no indication of a product quality issue with respect to the design, manufacture, or labeling of the device.Based on the information reviewed, there is no indication of a product quality issue with respect to manufacture, design or labeling.
|
|
It was reported that during the procedure to treat a very heavily calcified lesion in a non-tortuous saphenous vein graft (svg) to the circumflex (cx) coronary artery, an attempt to cross was made with a 3.5x28 rx vision bare metal stent (bms) system, but this device failed to cross due to patient anatomy and the proximal shaft separated into two pieces (approximately 10cm distal to the strain relief).The distal portion was able to simply be withdrawn from the anatomy without difficulty.An attempt to cross was then made with a 5.0x20 nc trek rx balloon dilatation catheter (bdc), but this device also failed to cross due to patient anatomy and the shaft became bent (kinked) and was withdrawn.A 4.0x12 non-abbott stent was able to cross and treat the lesion successfully.There were no adverse patient effects and no occurrence of a clinically significant delay.No additional information was provided.
|