|
The device was not returned for evaluation and remains in-situ.Four requests were made for imaging and additional information to assist with the investigation but a response was not received.Work order (b)(4) was reviewed and appears complete and correct.William cook australia medical director reviewed this case and made the following comment: "the most likely scenario would be that the previous stent graft was a straightforward endovascular aneurysm repair, and that bare stent at the top may well have compromised the left renal artery.Very hard to be sure without imaging." the device ifu states: "the long-term performance of fenestrated endovascular grafts, including the stents placed in fenestrations/scallops, has not yet been established.All patients should be advised that endovascular treatment requires life-long, regular follow-up to assess their health and the performance of their endovascular graft.Patients with specific clinical findings (e.G., endoleaks, enlarging aneurysms, changes in the structure or position of the endovascular graft, or stenosis/occlusion of vessels accommodated by fenestrations) should receive enhanced follow-up"."the zenith fenestrated aaa endovascular graft has not been evaluated in the following patient populations: patients with previous stent placement in vessels to be accommodated by fenestrations" "inaccurate placement and/or incomplete sealing of the zenith fenestrated aaa endovascular graft within the vessel may result in increased risk of endoleak, migration or inadvertent occlusion of the renal or internal iliac arteries.Renal artery patency must be maintained to prevent/reduce the risk of renal failure and subsequent complications.It is recommended that all vessels accommodated by a small fenestration be stented in order to secure positive alignment of the graft fenestration with the vessel origin"."potential adverse events that may occur and/or require intervention include, but are not limited to: renal complications and subsequent attendant problems (e.G., artery stenosis or occlusion, contrast toxicity, infarct, insufficiency, failure)".From the information received for this complaint it is difficult to determine a definitive root cause.There is no evidence of a device non-conformance or deficiency.It is possible that one or more of the following factors may have contributed to the difficulties experienced by the patient: thrombosed renal artery due to the bare metal stent of the previously placed graft compressing the renal stent.The struts of the suprarenal stent of the previously placed graft may have crossed the ostium of the renal artery creating difficulties with cannulation or stenting.The renal artery may have already had a pre-existing stent in situ from the previously placed graft, creating difficulties with cannulation and stenting.Occlusion of the renal artery due to movement of previously deployed graft, or newly deployed graft.Procedural factors.Patient factors.
|