(b)(4).During processing of this complaint, attempts were made to obtain complete event, patient and device information.(b)(4).The device is expected to be returned for evaluation.It has not yet been received.A follow up report will be submitted with all relevant information.
|
It was reported that the procedure was to treat an unspecified coronary artery.A 3.5 x 38 mm xience sierra stent delivery system was advanced; however, during post-deployment it was noted that the stent was missing.Due to poor imaging in the cath lab, the missing stent was not noticed during advancement.Intravascular ultrasound was used; however, the stent could not be found in the anatomy.A check of the dispenser coil found that the stent had come off the delivery system in the coil and was never on the balloon when deploying.Reportedly the site thought it was possible that in prepping the device, they inflated the balloon marginally but not enough to dislodge the stent from the balloon.Therefore, an unspecified xience sds was used to successfully complete the procedure.No additional information was provided.
|
Internal file number - (b)(4).Additional information: serial# added.Evaluation summary: the device was returned for analysis.The reported stent dislodgement was confirmed.It should be noted that the xience sierra everolimus eluting coronary stent system (eecss), instructions for use, notes: do not prepare or pre-inflate the delivery system prior to stent deployment other than as directed.Additionally, it states: prior to using the xience sierra eecss, carefully remove the system from the package and inspect for bends, kinks, and other damage.Verify that the stent does not extend beyond the radiopaque balloon markers.Do not use if any defects are noted.However, do not manipulate, touch, or handle the stent, which may cause coating damage, contamination, or stent dislodgement from the delivery balloon.In this case, it appears that the deviation related to incorrect prep (pre-inflation) may have contributed to the reported stent dislodgement.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 user error.Additionally, the dislodgement was not identified until after insertion into the anatomy indicating the required visual inspection prior to insertion into the anatomy was not performed (against instructions for use).There is no indication of a product quality issue with respect to manufacture, design or labeling.
|