|
Manufacturing review: lot history review revealed this is the only complaint related to an allegation of reocclusion for corporate lot number gfbv4108.The dhr review was conducted and there was nothing found to indicate there was a manufacturing related cause for this event.Investigation summary: the sample was not returned by the facility for further evaluation.It is known that approximately 9 months after the index procedure, patient¿s right femoral artery was reportedly reoccluded via duplex ultrasound imaging.A revascularization was performed involving another dcb and hcp deemed it was successful.The investigator assessed that the event was not related to the study device.Furthermore, the physician thinks the selection of an under sized pre-dilation balloon, during the index procedure, due to a measurement error with the ivus is attributed to the reported event.However, the lack of further information or the returned sample prevents both confirmation of the reported event and identification of a root cause(s).Label review: 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.
|
|
It was reported through a post market clinical study that a lutonix drug coated balloon (dcb) dilatation catheter was used to treat the right femoral artery.It was further reported that approximately 9-month post procedure, reocclusion was identified in the target lesion and a revascularization was performed successfully.The investigator determined that the event was possibly related to the procedure, but not related to the study device.
|