(b)(4).Catalog# is unknown but referred to as cook celect filter.Name and address for importer site: (b)(4).Since catalog# is unknown 510(k) could be either k061815, k073374, k090140, k112119, k121057 or k121629.(b)(4).It has not been possible to investigate or evaluate this alleged event based on the limited information provided to date.Cook will reopen its investigation if further information is receiving warranting supplementation in accordance with 21 c.F.R.803.56.
|
(b)(4).It has not been possible to further investigate or evaluate this alleged event based on the limited information provided to date via the operative note stating 'celect, tilt, vc perforation, shortness of breath, nausea'.Cook will reopen its investigation if further information is received warranting supplementation in accordance with 21 c.F.R.803.56.Vena cava wall perforation is a known potential complication of vena cava filters.Both symptomatic and asymptomatic events have been reported.Among other causes, vena cava wall perforation may inadvertently be initiated by improper deployment, excessive force or manipulations near an implanted filter (e.G., a surgical procedure in the vicinity of a filter) and (or) procedures that involve other devices being passed through an in situ filter.There is a current debate in the published scientific literature on a differentiation between ivc wall perforation with and without clinical sequelae.E.G.Filter legs may be outside the contrast lumen on imaging without actually perforating the ivc wall (known as tenting) and with no clinical sequelae.In contrast, perforation of adjacent organs is reported with clinical sequelae.Filter tilt is a known risk in relation to filter implant reported in the published scientific literature and may occur during placement or during implanting period.Unknown if the reported nausea is directly related to the filter and unable to identify corresponding failure mode(s) at this time.No evidence to suggest that this device was not manufactured according to specifications and nothing indicates that the filter did not perform as intended, e.G.Intended for the prevention of recurrent pulmonary embolism (pe) via placement in the vena cava.(b)(4).It has not been possible to further investigate or evaluate this alleged event based on the limited information provided to date via the operative note stating 'celect, tilt, vc perforation, shortness of breath, nausea'.Cook will reopen its investigation if further information is received warranting supplementation in accordance with 21 c.F.R.803.56.Vena cava wall perforation is a known potential complication of vena cava filters.Both symptomatic and asymptomatic events have been reported.Among other causes, vena cava wall perforation may inadvertently be initiated by improper deployment, excessive force or manipulations near an implanted filter (e.G., a surgical procedure in the vicinity of a filter) and (or) procedures that involve other devices being passed through an in situ filter.There is a current debate in the published scientific literature on a differentiation between ivc wall perforation with and without clinical sequelae.E.G.Filter legs may be outside the contrast lumen on imaging without actually perforating the ivc wall (known as tenting) and with no clinical sequelae.In contrast, perforation of adjacent organs is reported with clinical sequelae.Filter tilt is a known risk in relation to filter implant reported in the published scientific literature and may occur during placement or during implanting period.Unknown if the reported nausea is directly related to the filter and unable to identify corresponding failure mode(s) at this time.No evidence to suggest that this device was not manufactured according to specifications and nothing indicates that the filter did not perform as intended, e.G.Intended for the prevention of recurrent pulmonary embolism (pe) via placement in the vena cava.
|