| Model Number |
BEA28-70/I20-30 |
| Medical Device Problem Codes |
Loss of or Failure to Bond (1068); Leak/Splash (1354); Improper or Incorrect Procedure or Method (2017)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Codes |
Aneurysm (1708); Failure of Implant (1924)
|
| Date of Event |
12/13/2018
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Serious Injury
|
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
The devices involved in this event will not be returned for evaluation and remain implanted in the patient.If additional information is obtained at a later time that is pertinent to this event, a follow-up report will then be submitted.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
The patient was initially implanted with a bifurcated stent graft and two (2) limb stent grafts to treat an iliac aneurysm.The patient has a fusiform aneurysm more proximally but this was not treated.The surgeon reports that during the procedure the left limb extension was deemed to not have enough overlap with the main body.A bridging stent was placed and it was thought that this addressed the problem.However, approximately nine (9) months post initial procedure, a type 1b endoleak was suspected.The physician plans to re-intervene and will continue to monitor the patient.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
Additional information received per clinical assessment refuting the reported type ib endoleak; rather, there is evidence of a type ia endoleak.In addition, multiple attempts were made to confirm if re-intervention was completed for the patient, with no response received.This complaint will be updated if additional information is received at a later time.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
At the completion of the clinical evaluation and based on the information received, there was substantial evidence to support the following observations: the proximal fusiform aneurysm was confirmed to not be treated, and the type ib endoleak was refuted and rather, there is evidence of a type ia endoleak.The complaint is most likely user-related due to the non-exclusion of the proximal aneurysm at the initial implant; in addition, the initial case had an off-label aortic neck with neck length of 7mm (ifu states 15mm neck length required).The procedure-related harms for this complaint could not be determined, and the final patient status was reported to be under surveillance.The manufacturing lot review confirmed all devices met specifications prior to release.These types of events will be monitored and trended as part of the quality system.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|