|
(b)(4).During processing of this complaint, attempts were made to obtain complete event, patient and device information.Evaluation summary: the device was returned for analysis.The reported material deformation was confirmed.The reported difficulty to remove and difficulty to position were unable to be replicated in a testing environment as they are 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 identified no similar incidents from this lot.The investigation determined the reported difficulties appear to be related to circumstances of the procedure.The interaction with the tip of the guiding catheter resulted in the reported material deformation and subsequent difficulty to remove the device from the guiding catheter.There is no indication of a product quality issue with respect to manufacture, design or labeling.
|
|
It was reported that the procedure was to treat the distal left anterior descending artery that did not have any tortuosity nor calcification.The radial approach was taken and a 2.5 x 23 mm xience alpine stent delivery system (sds) was used.However, the sds did not have proper support from an unspecified guiding catheter, and the proximal part of the stent became caught on the tip of the guiding catheter.Therefore, the sds was pulled back and the stent strut was noted to be flared.The sds was then removed as a single unit with the guiding catheter.The femoral approach was then taken with an unspecified stent delivery system which was better supported with a different unspecified guiding catheter to successfully complete the procedure.There was no clinically significant delay in the procedure and no adverse patient effects.No additional information was provided.
|