| Model Number |
LXC-[14] |
| Health Effect - Clinical Codes |
Heartburn/Indigestion (1883); Hernia (2240); No Code Available (3191)
|
| Date of Event |
02/12/2020
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Serious Injury
|
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
(b)(4).Date sent: 3/19/2020.Attempts have been made to retrieve the device.To date the device has not been returned.If the device or further details are received at a later date a supplemental medwatch will be sent.The lot was not provided; therefore, the manufacturing record evaluation could not be performed.Attempts are being made to obtain the following information.To date no response has been provided.If further details are received at a later date a supplemental medwatch will be sent.Were you present during the explant procedure? what is the lot number for the linx device? was ph testing performed prior to explant to confirm recurrent reflux? after implant, was the device initially effective in controlling reflux? when did the recurrent reflux begin? was a hiatal hernia repair done during the implant procedure?.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
It was reported that the linx device was explanted on (b)(6) 2020 due to recurring gerd and a hiatal hernia.There were no patient consequences.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
(b)(4).Date sent: 04/13/2020.Additional information was requested, and the following was obtained: were you present during the explant procedure? - answer: no.What is the lot number for the linx device? - answer: unknown.Was ph testing performed prior to explant to confirm recurrent reflux? - answer: no.After implant, was the device initially effective in controlling reflux? - answer: yes.When did the recurrent reflux begin? - answer: (b)(6) 2019.Was a hiatal hernia repair done during the implant procedure? - answer: unknown.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
(b)(4).Date sent: 05/04/2020.Device analysis: overall review of the device function and dimensions show no anomalies from a device that has been reasonably changed as part of the explant procedure.The visual analysis was consistent with an explanted device.The link length and tensile force were found to meet the applicable specifications.Overall, no analysis conclusions relevant to the patient experience were found.The device lot number is unknown; therefore, the device history record could not be reviewed.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|