Catalog Number FG540000 |
Device Problem
No Pacing (3268)
|
Patient Problem
No Consequences Or Impact To Patient (2199)
|
Event Date 11/13/2018 |
Event Type
malfunction
|
Manufacturer Narrative
|
The hardware investigation has begun but it has not been completed at this time.When the investigational analysis has been completed, a supplemental 3500a report will be submitted.Manufacturer¿s ref # (b)(4).
|
|
Event Description
|
It was reported that a patient underwent an atrial fibrillation (afib) ablation procedure with a carto 3 system and a pacing issue occurred while engaged in emergency pacing.There were issues with pacing capabilities in the ref deca port and the mapping port.The catheter cable was replaced, and the issue remained.The catheter was moved to 20a port to proceed with the case and finish successfully.Additionally, it was reported that the pacing leads were connected to the pacing ports and direct ports.Pacing was both planned and emergency with no unwanted pacing being delivered.A bloom stimulator was used during the procedure.No patient consequences were reported.The event has been reviewed and assessed as mdr reportable.
|
|
Manufacturer Narrative
|
On(b)(6)2018 , the date of manufacture was recieved from the manufacture as 9/26/2011.Device manufacture date.Device manufacture date has been added.Manufacturer's ref # (b)(4).
|
|
Manufacturer Narrative
|
It was reported that a patient underwent an atrial fibrillation (afib) ablation procedure with a carto 3 system and a pacing issue occurred while engaged in emergency pacing.There were issues with pacing capabilities in the ref deca port and the mapping port.The catheter cable was replaced, and the issue remained.The catheter was moved to 20a port to proceed with the case and finish successfully.Device evaluation details: the device evaluation has been completed.It was reported the catheter was moved to 20 a port to proceed with the case and finished successfully.The field service engineer (fse) tested the carto 3 system and couldn't duplicate the issue.The fse re-imaged the workstation as preventive action.The device history record (dhr) review was performed by the manufacturer and no anomalies, which are related to the reported issue were noted in manufacturing or servicing of this equipment.Manufacturer¿s ref # (b)(4).
|
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|