MAUDE Adverse Event Report: CORDIS CORPORATION UNKNOWN TRAPEASE; FILTER, INTRAVASCULAR, CARDIOVASCULAR

Model Number 466P306X

Device Problem Failure to Align (2522)

Patient Problem Perforation of Vessels (2135)

Event Date 02/14/2018

Event Type  Injury  

Manufacturer Narrative

The catalog number is unknown, if received it will be provided.Complaint conclusion: as reported, the patient underwent placement of a trapease inferior vena cava (ivc) filter.The indication for filter placement is not available.The filter subsequently malfunctioned and caused injury and damages including, but not limited to tilt of the filter, perforation of filter strut(s) outside of the ivc.The filter remains implanted; thus, unavailable for analysis.The product was not returned for analysis and the sterile lot number has not been provided; therefore, no device analysis nor device history record review could be performed.The trapease vena cava filter is indicated for use in the prevention of recurrent pulmonary embolism (pe) via percutaneous placement in the vena cava for patients in which anticoagulants are contraindicated, anticoagulant therapy for thromboembolic disease has failed, emergency treatment following massive pulmonary embolism where anticipated benefits of conventional therapy are reduced or for chronic, recurrent pulmonary embolism where anticoagulant therapy has failed, or is contraindicated.The purpose of a vena cava filter is to catch thrombus from the lower extremities as it travels along normal blood flow patterns up towards the heart.Without procedural films for review, the filter tilt reported could not be confirmed.Additionally, the timing and mechanism of the filter tilt is unknown.Ivc filter tilt has been associated with the anatomy of the vessel, specifically asymmetry and tortuousness.It was reported that there was perforation of the ivc; however, a clinical conclusion could not be determined as to the cause of the event.A review of the instructions for use notes vessel damage such as intimal tears and perforation as procedural complications related it ivc filters.Ivc perforation from filters is relatively common, and directly related to how long the filter has been in place.Studies have noted a greater than 80% perforation rate overall, with all filters imaged after 71 days from implantation revealing some level of perforation.Clinical factors that may have influenced the event include patient, pharmacological and lesion characteristics.Without procedural films or images for review the reported event(s) could not be confirmed.Given the limited information available for review at this time, there is nothing to suggest that the reported events are related to the design and manufacturing process of the device; therefore, no corrective action will be taken.Should additional information become available, the file will be updated accordingly.

Event Description

As reported by the legal brief, the patient underwent placement of a trapease vena cava filter.The filter subsequently malfunctioned and caused injury and damages including, but not limited to: tilt of the filter, perforation of filter strut(s) outside of the ivc.As a direct and proximate result of these malfunctions, patient suffered life-threatening injuries and damages, and required extensive medical care and treatment.As a further proximate result, patient has suffered and will continue to suffer significant medical expenses, and pain and suffering, and other damages.

Event Description

As reported by the legal brief, the patient underwent placement of a trapease vena cava filter.The filter subsequently malfunctioned and caused injury and damages including, but not limited to: tilt of the filter, perforation of filter strut(s) outside of the ivc.As a direct and proximate result of these malfunctions, patient suffered life-threatening injuries and damages, and required extensive medical care and treatment.As a further proximate result, patient has suffered and will continue to suffer significant medical expenses, and pain and suffering, and other damages.The following additional information was received per implant records: the patient underwent extensive back reconstruction for spinal disease and experienced symptoms of dvt, verified by duplex scanning, while recuperating.A trapease ivc filter was deployed at the l2 level within the ivc via right femoral vein.A venacavogram showed excellent position and the procedure was completed.The patient was transferred back to the recovery room.The following additional information was received per patient profile form (ppf): the patient became aware of the reported events approximately 10 years and 3 months post implantation, however, the patient was unaware that his injuries may have been a result of the implanted filter until within 2 years of the complaint filing.The patient reports perforation of filter strut(s) outside the ivc, filter tilt.The patient also reports suffering from anxiety.Additionally, the patient reports a ct scan of the implanted trapease ivc filter reported tilt and perforation.

Manufacturer Narrative

Additional information: section a2 (age at the time of event, date of birth) section b3 (event date) section b5 (event description) section b7 (relevant medical history) section d11 (concomitant medical products: 6fr sheath) section g4 (date received by the manufacturer) complaint conclusion: as reported, the patient had placement of a trapease inferior vena cava (ivc) filter.Per the medical records, the indication was extensive back reconstruction for spinal disease and dvt, verified by duplex scanning, while recuperating.A trapease ivc filter was deployed at the l2 level within the ivc via right femoral vein.A venacavogram showed excellent position and the procedure was completed.The patient was transferred back to the recovery room.The filter subsequently malfunctioned and caused injury and damages including, but not limited to tilt of the filter, perforation of filter strut(s) outside of the ivc.Per the patient profile form (ppf), the patient reports perforation of filter strut(s) outside the ivc, filter tilt.The patient also reports suffering from anxiety.Additionally, the patient reports a ct scan of the implanted trapease ivc filter reported tilt and perforation.The product was not returned for analysis and the sterile lot number has not been provided; therefore, no device analysis nor device history record review could be performed.The trapease vena cava filter is indicated for use in the prevention of recurrent pulmonary embolism (pe) via percutaneous placement in the vena cava for patients in which anticoagulants are contraindicated, anticoagulant therapy for thromboembolic disease has failed, emergency treatment following massive pulmonary embolism where anticipated benefits of conventional therapy are reduced or for chronic, recurrent pulmonary embolism where anticoagulant therapy has failed, or is contraindicated.The purpose of a vena cava filter is to catch thrombus from the lower extremities as it travels along normal blood flow patterns up towards the heart.Without procedural films for review, the filter tilt reported could not be confirmed.Additionally, the timing and mechanism of the filter tilt is unknown.Ivc filter tilt has been associated with the anatomy of the vessel, specifically asymmetry and tortuousness.It was reported that there was perforation of the ivc; however, a clinical conclusion could not be determined as to the cause of the event.A review of the instructions for use notes vessel damage such as intimal tears and perforation as procedural complications related it ivc filters.Ivc perforation from filters is relatively common, and directly related to how long the filter has been in place.Studies have noted a greater than 80% perforation rate overall, with all filters imaged after 71 days from implantation revealing some level of perforation.Anxiety does not represent a device malfunction and may be related to underlying patient related issues.Clinical factors that may have influenced the event include patient, pharmacological and lesion characteristics.Without procedural films or images for review the reported event(s) could not be confirmed.Given the limited information available for review at this time, there is nothing to suggest that the reported events are related to the design and manufacturing process of the device; therefore, no corrective action will be taken.Should additional information become available, the file will be updated accordingly.

• Brand Name: UNKNOWN TRAPEASE
• Type of Device: FILTER, INTRAVASCULAR, CARDIOVASCULAR
• Manufacturer (Section D): CORDIS CORPORATION; 14201 nw 60 avenue; miami lakes FL 33014
• MDR Report Key: 9835911
• MDR Text Key: 188509717
• Report Number: 1016427-2020-03929
• Device Sequence Number: 1
• Product Code: DTK
• Combination Product (y/n): N
• PMA/PMN Number: K020316
• Number of Events Reported: 1
• Summary Report (Y/N): N
• Report Source: Manufacturer
• Source Type: other
• Type of Report: Initial,Followup
• Report Date: 05/08/2020

1 Device was Involved in the Event

1 Patient was Involved in the Event

• Is this an Adverse Event Report?: Yes
• Is this a Product Problem Report?: Yes
• Device Operator: Health Professional
• Device Model Number: 466P306X
• Device Catalogue Number: 466P306X
• Was Device Available for Evaluation?: No
• Initial Date Manufacturer Received: 02/20/2020
• Initial Date FDA Received: 03/16/2020
• Supplement Dates Manufacturer Received: 04/21/2020
• Supplement Dates FDA Received: 05/08/2020
• Is This a Reprocessed and Reused Single-Use Device?: No
• Patient Sequence Number: 1
• Patient Outcome(s): Life Threatening
• Patient Age: 64 YR