|
The sample was not returned from the user facility; therefore, a device evaluation is unable to be performed.The lot history review could not be conducted because the lot number, although requested, was not provided by the user facility.The dhr review also was not conducted because the facility did not provide the lot number.The actual sample was not returned for evaluation.The dhr review was not conducted because the facility did not provide the lot number.The investigator assessed the event was not related to the study device or index procedure.Based on the instructions for use (ifu), the occurrence of reocclusion is an inherent risk of any pta procedure, and has been reported in clinical trials of drug coated balloons.If additional information becomes known to the manufacturer, a supplemental report will be provided with all relevant information.The information provided by bd represents all of the known information at this time.Despite good faith efforts to obtain additional information, the complainant / reporter was unable or unwilling to provide any further patient, product, or procedural details to bd.
|
|
It was reported through a clinical registry that during a reintervention procedure, a lutonix percutaneous transluminal drug coated balloon (dcb) dilatation catheter was used to retreat the target lesion located in the left popliteal artery.Approximately 8 months after the reintervention procedure, the patient¿s left popliteal vessel was reportedly reoccluded.A revascularization was performed and the health care professional (hcp) deemed it was successful.The investigator assessed that the event was not related to the study device or index procedure.Although requested, the lot number for the lutonix dcb used in the first reintervention procedure is unavailable.The sample was discarded by the user facility and is not available for evaluation.No additional adverse patient effects were reported.
|