|
|
| Catalog Number |
C06150ML |
| Medical Device Problem Code |
Fracture (1260)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Code |
No Consequences Or Impact To Patient (2199)
|
| Date of Event |
07/16/2015
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Malfunction
|
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
As reported by the (b)(6) for sfa study, on (b)(6) 2013, the smart stent was deployed in the target lesion without any issue.Approximately twenty-five months ((b)(6) 2015) post implantation of the smart (120 150, sfa - 6x150mm) self¿expanding stent (ses) on the proximal to the distal portion of the right femoral artery, an x-ray photo showed breakage of the smart (120 150, sfa - 6x150mm) stent, it was a type ii stent fracture.However, there was no clinical symptom reported.There was no treatment applied to the patient and the patient did not recovered.Later, three years post stent implantation during patient visit it showed that no change was confirmed on the stent and the patient.There was no x-ray photo taken at this time.Then, four years post stent implantation during another patient visit it showed that no change was confirmed on the stent and the patient.There was x-ray photo taken at this time.It was reported that the event is related to the product and to the procedure.On (b)(6) 2013, the smart stent was deployed in the target lesion without any issue.The product was not returned for analysis.A device history record (dhr) review of lot (15851087) revealed no anomalies or non-conformances during the manufacturing and inspection processes that can be associated with the reported event.The reported ¿stent-ses fractured¿ could not be confirmed as the device was not returned for analysis.The exact cause could not be determined.Vessel characteristics of the superficial femoral artery (sfa) may have contributed to the reported event.There are multiple factors that can contribute to stent fracture in the sfa.The sfa is a very dynamic vessel that undergoes biomechanical forces such as flexion, torsion, compression, and elongation.Studies have also revealed that nitinol stent fractures occurred in cases of multiple stents and overlap related to an abnormal stress area that is created.The cumulative length of the stented segment unequivocally has been identified as the most important determinant for material fatigue and subsequent fracture.In this case, vessel/lesion characteristics, procedural factors and/or biomechanical forces likely contributed to the reported event.According to the warnings in the safety information in the instructions for use ¿placing multiple overlapping stents in the sfa may increase the possibility of stent fracture.¿ neither the device history record (dhr) nor the information available suggests a design or manufacturing related cause for the reported event; therefore, no corrective/preventive action will be taken at this time.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
As reported by the (b)(6) for sfa study, approximately twenty-five months ((b)(6) 2015) post implantation of the smart (120 150, sfa - 6x150mm) self¿expanding stent (ses) on the proximal to the distal portion of the right femoral artery, an x-ray photo showed breakage of the smart (120 150, sfa - 6x150mm) stent, it was a type ii stent fracture.However, there was no clinical symptom reported.There was no treatment applied to the patient and the patient did not recovered.Later, three years post stent implantation during patient visit it showed that no change was confirmed on the stent and the patient.There was no x-ray photo taken at this time.Then, four years post stent implantation during another patient visit it showed that no change was confirmed on the stent and the patient.There was x-ray photo taken at this time.It was reported that the event is related to the product and to the procedure.On (b)(6) 2013, the smart stent was deployed in the target lesion without any issue.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|
|
|