Pages: 1 2 [All]   Go Down
Print
Author Topic: Tightness  (Read 2254 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
dennis100
Moderators
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +24/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 61989


« on: October 25, 2018, 02:52:54 AM »

Model Number 102
Event Date 01/01/2013
Event Type  Injury   
Manufacturer Narrative
Review of the available programming and diagnostic history. Device manufacturing records were reviewed. Review of manufacturing records confirmed that the generator passed all functional tests prior to distribution.
 
Event Description
It was reported that the vns patient was experiencing a ¿shocking¿ and tightness sensation in the neck, possibly due to the strain-relief being lost as the patient grew up. System diagnostics returned impedance within normal ranges. Review of the available programming and diagnostic history showed device disablement on (b)(6) 2011. The patient¿s mother believed that vns therapy was made the patient¿s epilepsy worse, whether it was on or off, as it was irritating the patient. It was therefore decided to explant the vns system without replacement. The patient's device was explanted on (b)(6) 2013. The explanted devices have not been returned to date.

https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfmaude/detail.cfm?mdrfoi__id=4664019
Logged
dennis100
Moderators
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +24/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 61989


« Reply #1 on: October 25, 2018, 02:53:41 AM »

Model Number 106
Event Date 05/02/2016
Event Type  Injury   
Event Description
It was reported that a vns patient was complaining of sporadic painful stimulation at the generator site and radiating down through his left arm starting. Clinic notes received indicate the symptoms started on (b)(6) 2016 and were more intense with magnet activation. The condition progressed to constant sensation of tightness in chest and shortness of breath of approx. 1 hour duration until he taped the magnet over the device. The symptoms were alleviated for around 24 hours following pulse width adjustment from 500usec to 250usec and frequency adjustment from 30hz to 20hz on (b)(6) 2016 but then recurred. Full diagnostics were performed on (b)(6) 2016 and lead impedance on (b)(6) 2016 was normal 3,093 ohms. It was stated that the lead impedance was checked in varying neck positions. The physician elected to disable the device on (b)(6) 2016 and the patient was referred to a surgeon for anticipated exploratory surgery to explant and replace generator due to presumed malfunction/bleeding of current of vns system. X-rays were taken but nothing conclusive could be diagnosed by the providers. The x-rays were not provided to the manufacturer for review. The generator was successfully explanted and replaced on (b)(6) 2016 with no complications noted. The explanted generator was discarded by the explanting facility.
 
Manufacturer Narrative
(b)(4).
 
Event Description
An implant card was subsequently received for the procedure on (b)(6) 2016 indicating that a normal lead impedance of 3,373 ohms was observed with the newly implanted generator in place.

https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfmaude/detail.cfm?mdrfoi__id=5685905
Logged
dennis100
Moderators
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +24/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 61989


« Reply #2 on: October 25, 2018, 02:54:33 AM »

Model Number 304-20
Device Problem Adverse Event Without Identified Device or Use Problem
Event Date 01/01/2017
Event Type  Injury   
Manufacturer Narrative

Event Description
It was reported that a patient was experiencing pain in her chest and neck stiffness. The patient attributed her pain to vns. According to the patient, her pain had been occurring for a long time. The patient's generator was explanted due to the chest tightness. The explanting surgeon also reported that the lead had been placed on the phrenic nerve instead of the vagus nerve. The explanted generator was discarded and is unavailable for analysis. Follow-up with the explanting physician indicated that the patient's normal mode output current had been programmed off sometime prior to the surgery, indicating that the pain was not stimulation related. The patient had been seen by a cardiologist because she had experienced the chest pain, and the cardiologist said that the patient's heart was ok. The patient had experienced inflammation around the electrode site and laryngeal nerve irritation, but it did not appear that the lead had been explanted. No additional relevant information has been received to date.
 
Event Description
Additional follow-up with the nurse at the explanting facility indicated that the surgeon was unable to locate the patient's vns electrodes during surgery, even after dissecting 8 centimeters into the nerve. This led the physician to believe that the patient's lead had been implanted somewhere behind the sternocleidomastoid muscle, causing the tugging sensation and pain in the neck and chest. The lead was confirmed to have also been explanted. The surgeon's office could not determine whether the pain was chronic or related to the vns. Follow-up with the patient's following neurologist indicated that the patient had previously complained that she did not like the vns, stating that it caused her a lot pain. No additional relevant information has been received to date.

https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfmaude/detail.cfm?mdrfoi__id=6768932
Logged
dennis100
Moderators
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +24/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 61989


« Reply #3 on: October 25, 2018, 02:55:29 AM »

Model Number 103
Device Problem Adverse Event Without Identified Device or Use Problem
Event Date 09/01/2017
Event Type  Injury   
Event Description
The patient reported that they were having difficulty swallowing, catching their breath, and felt some tightness in their throat. It was reported to first occur with magnet stimulation, and has been getting worse in the past six months. The patient stated that recently the difficulty swallowing, catching her breath and tightness in her throat is constant, and not only occurring with stimulation. The patient stated that they were hospitalized and an upper gi test was performed that came back negative. The patient has not seen a neurologist in some time and was questioning if her battery needed replacement. The patient does not have a current neurologist she visits. No other relevant information has been received to date.
 
Event Description
Additional information was received from the patient's previous neurologist who stated that the patient has not been seen since (b)(6) 2018, and the doctor no longer sees the patient. The device was not interrogated at this time, and there were not medication changes. The patient never mentioned any difficulty swallowing, shortness of breath or throat tightness to the neurologist. No other relevant information has been received to date.
 
Event Description
Additional information was received via clinic notes that this patient¿s primary care provider is concerned that the patient¿s throat cancer is returning as the patient has experienced throat pain and hoarseness. Patient reports symptoms have been worsening recently. Patient reports at first inability to tolerate solids and no difficulty tolerating liquids. Patient reports history of throat cancer 2007 when they were treated with surgery as well as chemotherapy. The notes also report that the patient was a former smoker. No other relevant information has been received to date.

https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfmaude/detail.cfm?mdrfoi__id=7403911
Logged
dennis100
Moderators
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +24/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 61989


« Reply #4 on: October 25, 2018, 02:57:50 AM »

Model Number 102
Event Date 08/01/2010
Event Type  Injury   
Event Description
It was initially reported by the treating nurse practitioner that the pt was recently diagnosed with sleep apnea. The nurse believed that they were going to attempt to disable the device in the evenings during sleep to see if that would help resolve the issue as he was not having seizures at night, so the therapy was not needed at that time. The pt later reported that he believed the device was going to be disabled. He said that he was having difficulties breathing, had sinus issues, couldn't breathe through the nose, tightness in his chest and was not getting any sleep. He was said to have had a sleep study which did not provide any further info on the issues. He reported that when the magnet was taped to his chest, the issues resolved. The pt also reported the physician did not believe there was anything wrong with his heart. The pt claimed that since his lead and generator repositioning in 2008 (at the pt's request), he has lost seizure control since the seizures have returned to pre-vns baseline levels and the magnet activations have no longer become affective. The pt is requesting removal of the device. Programming history reviewed in manufacturer's programming history database indicating that the last known diagnostics performed were within normal limits. Good faith attempts to obtain additional info have been unsuccessful to date.

https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfmaude/detail.cfm?mdrfoi__id=1889162
Logged
dennis100
Moderators
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +24/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 61989


« Reply #5 on: October 25, 2018, 02:58:37 AM »

Model Number 102
Device Problem Adverse Event Without Identified Device or Use Problem
Event Date 05/01/2018
Event Type  Injury   
Event Description
It was reported that a patient's device would be explanted. Upon follow-up on the reason for explant, it was stated that the patient was having difficulty breathing over the past year. The patient had seen several doctors regarding the breathing issues and no doctor was able to determine the reason for the issues. The physician lowered settings for the difficulty breathing. It was unknown if this improved the patient's symptoms. A company representative attended the patient's appointment and noted that the patient was visibly swallowing hard and that the patient was also reporting tightness that occurred about 4-5 times a day. Settings were adjusted. The physician was unsure if the events were related to stimulation. Lead impedance was indicated to be ok. It was noted that the patient's device was replaced. The hospital was noted to be a no return site so the explanted generator will not be returned for analysis. No additional relevant information has been received to date.
 
https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfmaude/detail.cfm?mdrfoi__id=7701207
Logged
dennis100
Moderators
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +24/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 61989


« Reply #6 on: October 25, 2018, 02:59:35 AM »

Model Number 302-20
Device Problems Fracture; Appropriate Term/Code Not Available
Event Date 02/15/2018
Event Type  Malfunction   
Event Description
Patient was referred for surgery due to high impedance. Parents could not report any known trauma. The lead and generator were replaced and impedance was within normal limits after replacement. Additional information was received that high impedance was first observed by the neurologist prior to surgery. It is the neurologist's assessment that the lead was fractured based on the lead tightness and lead pin pull out. A lead fracture was not observed by the surgeon. The surgeon also did not visually see the lead pin out of the generator until the lead were removed to replace the generator. Lead fracture is suspected based on the high impedance observed prior to surgery. The explanted lead was received. Analysis is underway and has not been completed to date.

https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfmaude/detail.cfm?mdrfoi__id=7541148
Logged
dennis100
Moderators
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +24/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 61989


« Reply #7 on: October 25, 2018, 03:00:18 AM »

Model Number 302-20
Event Date 03/30/2012
Event Type  Malfunction   
Event Description
Reporter indicated a patient had vns generator replacement surgery for battery depletion, and lead replacement due to a suspected abraded insulation issue. No lead anomalies were visualized in the surgery, but the patient was experiencing painful stimulation and tightness in the chest area which was felt to be attributed to a breach in the lead insulation or possible fracture. The explanted devices will not be returned by the hospital per hospital policy.

https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfmaude/detail.cfm?mdrfoi__id=2614896
Logged
dennis100
Moderators
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +24/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 61989


« Reply #8 on: October 25, 2018, 03:02:03 AM »

Model Number 302-20
Event Date 01/19/2013
Event Type  Injury   
Manufacturer Narrative

Event Description
On (b)(6) 2013 the nurse practitioner reported that over the past weekend the patient started feeling pain in her neck at the lead site that radiates up to her jaw and neck and down her left arm and left leg. The patient stats that the pain is with stimulation but she feels a soreness in the area all of the time. The patient denies any trauma but the patient is raising a child that can sometimes be combative and has hit her in the head but she doesn't remember anything specific at the time she felt the pain. The patient's settings were output = 1. 75 ma/frequency = 20 hz/pulse width = 250 usec/on time = 30 sec/off time = 5 min. The patient was programmed off to output = 0 ma/frequency = 20 hz/pulse width = 250 usec/on time = 30 sec/off time = 5 min. She states the patient said the pain went away but she was still feeling the soreness. She states before she turned the patient off she did system diagnostics and all was ok with dcdc of 2 and neos = no. She is not sure at this point where she will proceed from here. The manufacturer's consultant later stated that he spoke with the patient on (b)(6) 2013 and she reported to him that on (b)(6) 2013 that she was having heart palpitations, along with nausea and vomiting that she thought was the onset of a migraine. Later the patient wasn't still "feeling right" so she decided to disable the device for the rest of the night. In the morning on 01/20/2013, the patient removed her magnet and she then started vomiting. She was also having tingling and numbness on her left side, so she again disabled the device with her magnet, which resolved the issues. The patient also noted that since this weekend, she was also feeling tightness where the electrodes are located and a lead pulling sensation in her neck when she uses her right arm to blow dry her hair. She said that she typically doesn't feel stimulation with the on-times, but does get voice alteration during the stimulation. The patient noted that she has a (b)(6) daughter that does like to jump on her. The patient is also getting efficacy from the therapy and is fearful that she is going to get worse because the nurse disabled the device on (b)(6) 2013. The patient's nurse practitioner indicated that the patient was implanted for treatment resistant depression in 2006 but also has a diagnosis of schizophrenia. The nurse stated that she recently had to turn the patient's device to zero as the patient began having pain in lead/generator area that radiated up to her jaw and down her left arm and leg. She stated all diagnostics were normal. The patient was going to be seen for follow-up on (b)(6) 2013 and the nurse has decided to keep the device turned off until that day. The patient is also considering meeting with her primary care physician to have her throat evaluated due to the feeling in her throat. The patient later indicated on (b)(6) 2013 that the constriction feeling in her neck was continuing to increase the previous night and the numbness in her extremities was disturbing, with an intolerable migraine type headache in forehead area with significant pressure at the base of the back of her head. She said the physician seems to think initial irritation of the vagus nerve is possibly consistent with the intermittent issues he has seen with devices nearing end of battery life. X-rays were taken and a ct with no visual concern. The diagnosis was painful neuropathy and migraine. The patient was given iv fluids, steroids to reduce inflammation, iv phenergan, and a prescription of neurontin. The patient stated that on (b)(6) 2013 there is less constriction in the neck, the migraine persists, and neuropathic pain. The patient stated that the discomfort is more tolerable without the constricting feeling in the neck. On (b)(6) 2013 the manufacturer's consultant stated that he met with the patient and the nurse practitioner that day and the patient has been through a lot of psychological issues. He started with a summary of the events saying that on (b)(6) 2013 the patient's symptoms got so bad (constriction in her neck), that she had to go to the emergency room and at that time felt a tingling in her extremities and pain in her left arm and up to the electrodes in her neck. The emergency room doctor said he had never seen anyone with vns but has seen patients with other similar devices and thought maybe vns caused damage to the nerve. Therefore, he gave her steroids to treat nerve pain. With these iv steroids all the events went away. Now the patient's symptoms are completely gone and the device is disabled. The patient also reported that the week of (b)(6) 2013 she lost her voice; she had virtually no voice and said it was as if the stimulation was on all of the time based on her losing her voice. As of today, the patient's depression is still better than pre-vns levels but the patient is starting to get anxious that the vns is not on. The consultant stated he will get x-rays and the emergency room report and will send that to the manufacturer for review. The nurse practitioner stated that with the device being disabled, all the events resolved except for the neuropathic pain and tingling in the extremities/discomfort. It was reported that it was thought that the emergency room diagnosed the event as neuropathic pain to get insurance to pay for it but the patient is not having any events now. The nurse practitioner believes that all of the patient's events are due to vns. She did report however, that the heart palpitations, tingling, numbness, and vomiting/nausea are not occurring with stimulation. No causal or contributory programming or medication changes precede the onset of the events. The patient does not have a medical history of any of these events (pre-vns). The patient's device was disabled but since the patient is desperate to have vns working, they want to have a full revision surgery as they believe the vns is causing the patient's symptoms. On (b)(6) 2013 the device was programmed back on to output = 1 ma/frequency = 500 usec/on time = 30 sec to run system and normal mode diagnostics; which were within normal limits. The system diagnostics showed dcdc = 3/eri = no and normal mode showed dcdc = 2/eri = no. The patient was then disabled again. Although surgery is likely, it has not occurred to date.
 
Event Description
Information was received that the patient was scheduled for a generator replacement on (b)(6) 2013. Three diagnostics were performed, which confirmed that there were no issues with the lead, so the lead would not be replaced. It was later confirmed that the replacement surgery took place on this day. The explanted generator was returned to the manufacturer on (b)(4) 2013.
 
Event Description
It was reported that the patient developed neuropathy on the left side of her neck and that her discomfort was severe. It was reported that the device was programmed off and the patient required treatment with steroids to resolve the pain. The nurse reported that x-rays were not helpful in identifying the problem. The nurse indicated that there was no high impedance and the device is not at end of service. The nurse reported that the patient experienced successful response to vns when the device was programmed on and that attempts to have the surgery performed are underway.
 
Event Description
It was reported that the patient was seen for a consult appointment to have the vns generator removed. The patient states that she is afraid of having it replaced and then having difficulty getting it replaced again in the future. However, the physician believes the patient should still stay implanted for now as he wants the patient to get a new generator and believes having a separate explant surgery would cause too much scarring. Additional follow up found that the patient saw the neurologist and everything was within normal limits (specifics not provided). It was noted that the patient's device was disabled and the patient complained of pain when interrogation, but physician said it was only during interrogation and he didn't think it was the device. The patient was referred back to the epilepsy center for epilepsy evaluation. It was unclear if the diagnostics were actually performed and if the patient may have felt pain during the diagnostic.
 
Event Description
On (b)(4) 2013 a referral was received for replacement of the vns due to it ¿failing¿. It was stated that the vns had been turned off the psychiatrist due to severe pain on the vagus nerve. It was reported that the patient has a possible lead fracture.
 
Event Description
Additional information was received on (b)(6) 2013 when it was reported that the patient recently had her device turned off on (b)(6) 2013 due to pain in the neck. This pain started on (b)(6) 2013 and the patient had disabled the device herself by using her magnet which helped. The patient also started vomiting when she removed the magnet. The reporter also explained that when the patient uses her right arm to blow-dry her hair, she feels a tightening feeling around the electrodes in the left side of her neck. She explained that she was seen in the er and the er physician informed her that she is experiencing irritation to the vagus nerve which he has seen previously when other implanted devices were nearing the end of their service life. She stated that x-rays had been taken and she was placed on iv fluids as well as steroids to help with the adverse events she was experiencing. The patient was anxious about what may happen as far as her depression since the nurse practitioner had turned off her device. Since the device has been off the patient has felt a lot of anxiety and is not sleeping hardly at all; she stated that it is like "time has no meaning". The reporter also mentioned that she had seizures prior to implant which stopped after being implanted. It was later reported that the patient's device appeared to be functioning normally when queried but she had significant discomfort and developed neuropathy. She was treated with steroids and neurontin for that and it resolved. Clinic notes were received. Review of the notes dated (b)(6) 2013 state that this was an emergency session to adjust the vns settings due to palpitations and discomfort. The patient had pain in left side of jaw with radiation down left arm that had worsened since that weekend. The pain was reported to be intolerable. The patient felt discomfort all down the left side and since the vns was turned off with the magnet she felt better. The patient was anxious and mildly paranoid. Diagnostics showed the device to be functioning properly. Clinic notes dated (b)(6) 2013 indicate that the patient was being treated for neuropathy in the neck and is feeling better physically. Clinic notes dated (b)(6) 2013 indicate that the patient's device is now "failing" and is trying to get a replacement. Although surgery is likely, it has not occurred to date.
 
Event Description
Generator analysis was approved on (b)(4) 2014. The generator was returned with output currents set to 0 ma. Analysis showed that the septum was not cored, thus eliminating the possibility of a potential unintended electrical current path through body fluids. In the pa lab, the device output signal was monitored for more than 24-hrs, while the generator was placed in a simulated body temperature environment. Results showed no signs of variation in the pulse generator¿s output signal and demonstrated that the device provided the expected level of output current for the entire monitoring period. The pulse generator diagnostics were as expected for the programmed parameters. The generator performed according to functional specifications. During the product analysis, there were no anomalies found with the pulse generator.
 
Event Description
On (b)(6) 2013 the patient mentioned that she had a device malfunction in january and subsequent device disablement since the event. The nurse later reported that the vns patient had a device failure because the patient developed severe pain/discomfort at the electrode site. It was stated that diagnostics were performed that indicated the device is not near end of service and that the lead impedance was ¿ok. ¿ the nurse stated that she feels that there is an issue with the lead despite the diagnostic results due to the patient¿s clinical symptoms. X-rays were also reported to have been taken, which didn¿t show anything. The device was disabled temporarily and it did get better about two weeks after the device was disabled. She stated that diagnostics were even taken with the patient in different positions and while the device functioned properly during all of these tests, she still believes that there is an issue that is causing the patient¿s events. The patient was referred to the surgeon for revision. Although surgery is likely, it has not occurred to date. Device manufacturing records were reviewed. Review of manufacturing records confirmed that the lead passed all functional tests prior to distribution.
 
Event Description
On (b)(6) 2013 it was reported that the patient¿s illness is rapidly progressing as she waits for surgery. Although surgery is likely, it has not occurred to date.

https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfmaude/detail.cfm?mdrfoi__id=2966248
Logged
dennis100
Moderators
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +24/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 61989


« Reply #9 on: October 25, 2018, 03:02:59 AM »

Model Number 102
Event Date 07/25/2011
Event Type  Injury   
Event Description
It was initially reported that the pt began experiencing pain and tightness in his chest following a mri. The pain is continuous and not related to stimulation. The physician recommended alternating disablement (2 hours on/off). The physician then disabled the pt for a week and the pain started to resolve. When the device was turned back on the pain returned immediately, so the physician turned him back off. A prophylactic replacement is planned, but has not occurred to date. (b)(6) attempts for more info have been unsuccessful to date.
 
Event Description
Good faith attempts for product return have been unsuccessful to date.
 
Event Description
Additional information was received regarding the patient. The patient is going to be explanted and not replaced at this time. They are going to see if the pain subsides and potentially re-implant later. The pain was reported to still be present with the generator disabled. The generator had been explanted and has not been returned to the manufacturer.

https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfmaude/detail.cfm?mdrfoi__id=2245806
Logged
dennis100
Moderators
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +24/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 61989


« Reply #10 on: October 25, 2018, 03:03:56 AM »

Model Number 102
Event Date 01/01/2013
Event Type  Injury   
Event Description
It was reported that the patient's vns was explanted on (b)(6) 2015 due to the patient not wanting vns any longer and feeling that vns did not help her. Both the generator and majority of the lead was explanted. On (b)(6) 2015, the patient was doing well after explant. The nurse reported that the patient has a lot of psychiatric issues, so the patient thought vns was causing a lot of the problems. However, the nurse does not think that vns necessarily was and that it was likely more psych-related. The explanted devices have not been received by the manufacturer for analysis to date. Clinic notes dated (b)(6) 2015 reported that the presented to the clinic on (b)(6) 2014 with complaints of left shoulder and chest being "inflamed. " she was advised to go to nearest er for evaluation but the patient declined. At that time, the patient was still wanting the vns settings to be adjusted. The neurologist assessed that since the patient had non-epileptic seizures, there was no plan to revise the vns. However, due to the patient's complaints, the decision was made to explant the vns. The patient reported redness and warmth over the left chest intermittently and typically applied an icepack to the area to relieve the symptoms. The patient stated that she had symptoms related to the vns when it is on, including throat tightness and right shoulder pain. However although the device was off, the patient still complained of difficulty swallowing at times with right arm pain and swelling. Therefore at that time, the surgeon assessed that the events very likely may have not been related to vns.
 
Event Description
It was reported that the patient's the device was previously turned off due to painful stimulation. Explant may occur due to reasons unrelated to vns therapy. However, no known surgical interventions have occurred to date.
 
Manufacturer Narrative

Manufacturer Narrative

Event Description
Analysis was completed on the explanted products. In the pa lab, the device output signal was monitored for more than 24-hours, while the generator was placed in a simulated body temperature environment. Results showed no signs of variation in the pulse generator¿s output signal and demonstrated that the device provided the expected level of output current for the entire monitoring period. The pulse generator diagnostics were as expected for the programmed parameters. Analysis in the analysis lab concluded proper functionality of the pulse generator and that no abnormal performance or any other type of adverse condition was found. Note that since a portion of the lead (including the electrode array) was not returned for analysis, an evaluation and resulting commentary cannot be made on that portion of the lead. Other than typical wear and explant related observations, no anomalies were identified in the returned lead portion.
 
Event Description
Additional information was received stating that the vns patient¿s swollen generator site was causing the patient to experience painful stimulation. No known surgical interventions have occurred to date.
 
Event Description
The explanted generator and lead were received by the manufacturer for analysis. However, analysis has not been completed to date.
 
Event Description
On (b)(6) 2014, it was reported that the generator site is "extremely" swollen (described as the size of a pocket with four generators inside), which has been like this for about a year. It was confirmed that the swelling was not normal. The patient also reports periodic swelling at the incision site in the neck. Normal mode diagnostics were performed with showed dcdc = 3. It was noted that the patient recently had an mri and it was not turned off during the procedure. At this time, the patient would like it resolved since she is getting efficacy and would prefer to not have the device explanted. Surgery is likely, but has not occurred to date.

https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfmaude/detail.cfm?mdrfoi__id=3627213
Logged
dennis100
Moderators
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +24/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 61989


« Reply #11 on: October 25, 2018, 03:05:54 AM »

Model Number 302-20
Event Date 05/09/2011
Event Type  Injury   
Event Description
It was initially reported by the epileptologist that the patient was to undergo a prophylactic generator replacement, and at the same time have his lead released from scar tissue. Additional information was received through an implant card indicating that the patient's lead was replaced and the patient had been experiencing coughing, tightness in the lead, and difficulty breathing. A review of the patient's history showed that the patient was implanted in 2006. The patient had started experiencing pain and tightness in his neck, following implant. This resulted in a procedure to release his lead wire from scar tissue in (b)(6) 2009. At that time, the procedure was performed for patient comfort. Follow up with the surgeon revealed that the patient's pain and tightness had reoccurred approximately a year after the previous surgery. The symptoms had gradually worsened, until it caused the patient pain and coughing when he turned his head to the right. During the procedure to loosen the lead wire from the scar tissue, the surgeon noticed damage to the "lead sheath" so he replace the lead wire. He indicated that the patient had developed severe fibrosis which entrapped the cable causing the pain, coughing, and discomfort. The fibrosis was also restricting the patient's neck motion. The surgeon stated that the procedure was performed primarily for patient comfort, but also potentially to preclude a serious injury. Follow up for additional information regarding the damage to the lead has been unsuccessful to date. The explanted products have not been returned to the manufacturer for product analysis.

https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfmaude/detail.cfm?mdrfoi__id=2129926
Logged
dennis100
Moderators
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +24/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 61989


« Reply #12 on: October 25, 2018, 03:06:40 AM »

Model Number 304-20
Device Problem Adverse Event Without Identified Device or Use Problem
Event Date 04/01/2018
Event Type  Injury   
Manufacturer Narrative

Event Description
It was reported that the patient had a consultation visit due to a "cuff complaint. " follow up with the physician's office resulted in the manufacturer receiving the consult notes for the patient. The notes indicated that the patient experienced discomfort at the left neck vns site. The patient had a prominent mass at the location and had experienced difficulty sleeping at night due to the discomfort and sensation of tightness in the neck. It was reported that there was mild bowstringing of the wire and prominence of an anchor at the neck. The patient underwent a superficial vns lead revision to remove the prominent hardware and relax the wire. No additional relevant information has been received to date.

https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfmaude/detail.cfm?mdrfoi__id=7707618

Logged
dennis100
Moderators
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +24/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 61989


« Reply #13 on: October 25, 2018, 03:07:33 AM »

Model Number 103
Device Problem Adverse Event Without Identified Device or Use Problem
Event Date 03/04/2014
Event Type  Injury   
Event Description
The physician did not believe that the patient had vocal cord paralysis, but instead just had hoarseness. The dysphagia was occurring with stimulation, and the patient felt the painful stimulation at the neck and electrode and generator incision sites. Diagnostic results from (b)(6) 2015 were within normal limits and did not indicate a device malfunction.
 
Event Description
It was reported that a patient was experiencing tightness in her chest, vocal cord paralysis, dysphagia, and sleeping difficulties due to the tightness in her chest. These events started after she had thyroid surgery in (b)(6) 2014, but they just started getting worse recently. The physician programmed the device off on (b)(6) 2015 to determine if the issues were related to stimulation, but left the patient's magnet output current at 1. 5ma. The physician attempted to perform system diagnostics, but the patient felt pain during the stimulation and was unable to complete the test. The physician planned to turn the patient's device back on at the next appointment, but the patient did not go to the appointment because she was no longer feeling tightness in her chest, the dysphagia had resolved, her voice had come back, and she was no longer feeling painful stimulation. The patient did not want to have her device turned on for at least a month because she did not want to experience the side effects and she could not afford to go to another appointment. Attempts for further information have been unsuccessful to date.

https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfmaude/detail.cfm?mdrfoi__id=5171609
Logged
dennis100
Moderators
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +24/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 61989


« Reply #14 on: October 25, 2018, 03:08:25 AM »

Model Number 304-20
Device Problem Insufficient Information
Event Date 05/15/2015
Event Type  Injury   
Event Description
It was reported that the patient was seen by the ent and diagnosed with left vocal cord paralysis and will not need a vns revision. It was reported that the vocal cord paralysis may be temporary. The patient is doing physical therapy for the vocal cord paralysis and the ent reported that the neurologist should be able to start ramping up the patient's vns therapy.
 
Manufacturer Narrative

Event Description
Initially, it was reported that the patient had a constant cough and she was unable to eat. It was also reported that the patient had no voice from the surgery but has improved. The patient's generator had not yet been programmed on. It was later reported that the physician met with the patient and the patient's voice was better and the coughing was also improving. The patient's generator has not yet been programmed on. Later it was reported that the patient is having discomfort where the leads are presumably when she turned her neck towards the right. It was also stated that the turning motion, with the device off, prompts coughing. The patient was seen again and reported that the generator site was tender. The generator was protruding, but has not extruded through the skin. Due to the complaints of pain at the electrode site and the generator site, coughing to the point of vomiting, and voice alteration, exploratory surgery was performed. The surgeon ran diagnostics with the lead in multiple positions and all measurements were within the acceptable range. The surgeon redid the strain relief loop and tie downs. After the surgery, it was reported by the physician that the coughing had been resolved and the patient's voice is almost back to normal. The pain in the area of the generator was attributed to the scar related to the vicryl suture. The patient's generator has not yet been programmed on, but the patient is once again complaining of voice changes and tightness when turning the neck towards the opposite side previously reported. The patient was referred to an ent for evaluation. No additional relevant information has been received to date.
 
Manufacturer Narrative
(b)(4). This information was inadvertently left off of the initial mfr. Report.

https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfmaude/detail.cfm?mdrfoi__id=4911583
Logged
dennis100
Moderators
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +24/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 61989


« Reply #15 on: October 25, 2018, 03:09:23 AM »

Model
« Last Edit: January 25, 2019, 02:14:38 PM by dennis100 » Logged
dennis100
Moderators
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +24/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 61989


« Reply #16 on: October 25, 2018, 03:10:44 AM »

Model Number 302-20
Event Date 05/06/2013
Event Type  Malfunction   
Event Description
On october 3, 2013, the manufacturer received a letter from the food and drug administration (fda) providing a report from the fda's medwatch program. Based on the nature and timing of the reported pain, dyspnea, and muscle spasms, it is possible that the event is related to the high impedance event. Below is the quoted event description from the medwatch report (mw5031542): "volun 27-aug-2013: i had a vagal nerve stimulator implanted on (b)(6) 2010 at a hospital. The vns was to control irretraceable seizures from juvenile myoclonic epilepsy. From the time the vns was turned on, i experienced severe tightening of my throat, extreme hoarseness (usually laryngitis for several days after the vns was adjusted,) and stinging pain in my throat every time the device was sending electrical currents (approximately every 2 minutes). Beginning in (b)(6) 2013, my neck began to cramp when the vns would send the current and my seizures became more and more frequent. During the weekend of (b)(6) 2013, the side effects became so severe that i was having trouble breathing. My throat felt like it was closing up. During my routine neurologist visit on (b)(6), it was determined through diagnostic testing that my vagus nerve was not receiving any of the electrical stimulation the vns was sending out. The vns was immediately turned off and after an appointment with my neurosurgeon, i had revision surgery on (b)(6) 2013. ".
 
Event Description
On (b)(6) 2013 it was reported that the lead impedance after surgery was noted to be ¿ok¿. Attempts were made for the return of both the lead and generator but neither product has been returned for product analysis to date.
 
Event Description
On (b)(6) 2013 it was reported that the vns patient was experiencing tightness and in her neck that started about two weeks ago. The nurse also stated that the patient has been experiencing an increase in seizures that started around the same time, two weeks ago. The device was interrogated on (b)(6) 2013 and the settings were output=0. 75ma/frequency=30hz/pulse width=250usec/on time=30sec/off time=1. 1min/magnet output=1ma/magnet on time=30sec/magnet pulse width=500usec. High impedance was observed on (b)(6) 2013 with output=limit/lead impedance=high/dcdc=7/eos = no. The patient¿s vns was disabled due to the high impedance. The nurse stated that almost immediately after the device was disabled, the tightness that the patient was experiencing improved. There has not been any recent trauma and the patient denied any device manipulation. X-rays were ordered and the patient was referred for surgery. It was reported that the patient previously was followed by a different physician but that physician has left the practice. The patient was last interrogated in (b)(6) 2012 and per the patient¿s chart, device diagnostics were not performed at that time. Device manufacturing records were reviewed. Review of manufacturing records confirmed that the lead passed all functional tests prior to distribution. The nurse later reported that the patient had also been experiencing voice changes during the same time as the tightness in the neck. She stated that they do not have a copy of the patient¿s x-rays but that the patient might have a copy that could be sent to us; she stated she would follow-up with the patient regarding this. No further information has been provided to date. Although surgery is likely, it has not occurred to date.
 
Manufacturer Narrative
Manufacturer reviewed x-rays of implanted device. X-rays reviewed by the manufacturer, no gross lead discontinuities visualized. The lead pin could not be seen past the second connector block, indicating that it may not be fully inserted into the generator.
 
Event Description
On (b)(6) 2013 ap neck and chest and a lateral chest x-rays were received for review. The images were dated (b)(6) 2013. The generator was seen in normal orientation in the left chest area. The filter feedthru wires and lead at the connector pin appear intact. The lead pin could not be seen past the second connector block, indicating that it may not be fully inserted into the generator. A portion of the lead appeared to be present behind the generator. The electrodes were observed in the neck and appeared to be in proper alignment. Based on the x-ray images provided, the cause of the high impedance is unknown; however, it could be related to a possible lead pin insertion issue. The presence of additional micro-fractures in the lead also cannot be ruled out.
 
Manufacturer Narrative
Device failure is suspected, but did not cause or contribute to a death.
 
Event Description
On (b)(6) 2013 the nurse reported that pa and lateral chest x-rays have been performed and will be sent for review; however they have not been received by the manufacturer to date. The nurse also stated that around the time the patient started to notice voice changes and tightness with stimulation, her seizure frequency increased from 1-2 times per week to once per night. During this time the patient was also not sleeping well therefore it was unclear what was causing the increase in seizures. The surgeon noted that he suspects a malfunction of the vns as her chest x-ray revealed the vns to be in continuity. The patient underwent a full revision surgery on (b)(6) 2013. Attempts were made for the return of the explanted generator but it has not been received by the manufacturer.
 
Manufacturer Narrative
Follow-up report #1 should have stated that attempts were made for the return of both the lead and generator, instead of just the generator.

https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfmaude/detail.cfm?mdrfoi__id=3167236
Logged
dennis100
Moderators
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +24/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 61989


« Reply #17 on: October 25, 2018, 03:15:12 AM »

Model Number 302-20
Event Date 01/09/2012
Event Type  Injury   
Manufacturer Narrative

Event Description
Additional information was received on (b)(6) 2012 when the patient stated that her throat hurt with stimulation the night before but not as much in this morning. The patient said the magnet swipes help with seizures, but sometimes her husband swipes the magnet when she is coming out of a seizure and she can't tell him not to, and then it hurts. The patient was seen by the neurologist on (b)(6) 2012 and the vns device was interrogated and system diagnostics were performed which showed results within normal limits; lead impedance=ok/dcdc=2. The patient's generator was programmed to output=1. 5ma/frequency=30hz/pulse width=250usec/on time=7sec/off time=0. 3min/magnet output=2ma/magnet on time=60sec/magnet pulse width=250usec. During the final interrogation, the patient appeared to have an absence seizure then coughed and said she was having pain at the generator site. During the seizure, the magnet had been swiped. The generator was then programmed off, both in normal and magnet mode. The neurologist stated that he is going to leave the generator off until a 3 day video eeg can be done. On (b)(6) 2012, the patient reported that she is 2 days into the ambulatory monitoring and says she has had nocturnal seizures and migraines while monitored, but these are better tolerated without vns; she stated that vns gives her after effects like pain. The patient said she has discomfort above the generator randomly for 20-30 minutes at a time which is the same as before vns was turned off. The patient was seen for a follow-up visit on (b)(6) 2012 and the physician stated that he believes the patient's pain and "tightness" or limited range of movement, are psychiatric in nature and not related to vns. The physician turned the patient's device back on and the patient will not be seen again for another month.
 
Event Description
The patient called and was crying and upset. Frustrated that she cannot tolerate the increases to her device. She is depressed because she has not been able to return to her former level of functioning prior to her re-implant last year. The patient's treating physician is aware of the patient's issues tolerating their stimulation and an appointment was going to be made for the patient to be seen for evaluation.
 
Event Description
On (b)(6) 2012, a vns treating neurologist reported to the manufacturer's consultant that the vns patient was experiencing a 'tightness" in her neck and that over the weekend the patient's range of motion decreased and she could only turn her head about 10% in either direction. There is no pain with stimulation and the range of motion is independent of stimulation. Over the weekend, the patient also experienced a seizure and went to the emergency room. It took the patient a few days to recover. It was reported that the patient does not take her medications on a regular basis and she has a stressful lifestyle. On the friday before the weekend, (b)(6) 2012, the physician increased the patient's settings from an output of 1. 5ma to 1. 75ma. The patient remained in the office for 10-15 minutes following the programming change and reported that she was tolerating the increase. The patient was also observed on friday for her report that she had a clicking noise in her throat, however, no clicking occurred during the clinical visit and it lasted for 45 minutes. The patient reported that she had experienced two episodes of clicking in the front of her throat during stimulation. She stated that the clicking lasted for 30-60 seconds and the episodes were two weeks apart. There was no discomfort associated with this. The patient stated that the previous weekend, she also had a breakthrough seizure on (b)(6) 2012. The patient self-medicated with dilantin which elevated her dilantin level. Previously it had been six weeks since she had a seizure. The patient further stated that her husband is not using the recommended magnet swipe technique for her seizures. The husband was reported to be holding the magnet over the chest during the entire seizure, which disables stimulation, and then moved it away when the seizure stops. This then results in an uncomfortable strong stimulation after the seizure. Additional information has been requested but no further information has been received from the physician to date.
 
Event Description
Further reports regarding this patient's increased seizures with the suspect generator were received and all further relevant information regarding this event will be captured mfr. Report # 1644487-2017-03470.

https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfmaude/detail.cfm?mdrfoi__id=2461478
Logged
dennis100
Moderators
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +24/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 61989


« Reply #18 on: December 19, 2018, 01:09:54 PM »

Model Number 102
Event Date 01/01/2006
Event Type  Injury   
Event Description
The pt reported that she had lost 18 pounds in last month or so and was still losing, had no appetite and had to force food down. She additionally reported that she had been receiving ect treatments because her depression was "so bad. " reported "i felt pretty good for a couple of weeks, but as soon as my period arrived, it all went downhill. I'm, perimenopausal and am on hormone therapy. I'm working with my ob/gyn to adjust them, as now i'm having about 2 periods a month - and like clockwork as soon as they hit, i go downhill into serious depression. So i'm averaging about 1 good week per month. " the pt's treating physician did not know if the pt's weight loss was vns related and possibly related to the pt's depression. The pt reported that they were thinking of getting the vns taken out due to throat tightness with stimulation and lack of efficacy, no malfunction suspected. The treating physician did not think that pt was a good candidate for vns therapy. Good faith attempts will be made for product return for analysis.

https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfmaude/detail.cfm?mdrfoi__id=1199909
Logged
dennis100
Moderators
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +24/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 61989


« Reply #19 on: December 19, 2018, 01:10:47 PM »

Model Number 106
Device Problem Adverse Event Without Identified Device or Use Problem
Event Date 06/26/2018
Event Type  Injury   
Manufacturer Narrative
"device evaluated by mfr?": device evaluation is not necessary because the reported events are related to device functionality.

Event Description
At the previous replacement the patient's new generator was placed closer to her clavicle and "causing" discomfort from the generator hitting the clavicle. Now the patient has been referred for revision due to the patient complaining of the vns being too high near the clavicle, the generator turning, and the lead feeling as if there is no slack. Information from the implanting surgeon reported that 3-0 vicryl sutures were used for the implant, which are absorbable sutures. Per the current surgeon, the surgery is both for patient comfort and to preclude serious injury. The surgeon believes the reason for the generator turning is due to a broken tie down stitch and that the placement of the generator near the clavicle could have led to muscle movement contributing to the generator movement. The current surgeon also believes the lead tightness may be due to the healing of the implant as well as possible higher placement of the electrodes. And perhaps the strain relief loop not being sufficient. The last known diagnostics were noted within normal limits. Surgery has not occurred to date. No additional relevant information has been received to date.

https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfmaude/detail.cfm?mdrfoi__id=8033126
Logged
dennis100
Moderators
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +24/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 61989


« Reply #20 on: December 19, 2018, 01:11:30 PM »

Model Number 302-20
Event Date 01/01/2008
Event Type  Malfunction   
Event Description
Reporter indicated that upon receiving a safety alert letter regarding potential short circuits in the lead, she was certain that the patient had a short circuit. The reporter had previously indicated that the patient has a shocking sensation in the neck, and had also denied that there was a shocking sensation, but that the patient felt a tightness in left pectoral region when the left arm was raised, and is now again alleging that the patient feels a shocking sensation. All attempts for more information, including programming history, so as to confirm or rule out a shor circuit, have been unsuccessful to date.

https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfmaude/detail.cfm?mdrfoi__id=1505059
Logged
dennis100
Moderators
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +24/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 61989


« Reply #21 on: December 19, 2018, 01:12:12 PM »

Model Number 103
Event Date 05/25/2012
Event Type  Injury   
Manufacturer Narrative

Event Description
It was initially reported that the patient was complaining of hoarseness and dysphagia. At the time, it was noted by the surgeon that the patient may have had these issues prior to vns and it was unclear if the issues had worsened with vns stimulation. Additional information was received on (b)(6) 2012 indicating that the generator had been disabled due to muscle tightness and swelling in the neck, which may have always been there, but now the physician felt that the vns may be interfering with his vocal cords. Per the physician, the patient had been evaluated by two separate physicians and his vocal cord was found to be partially paralyzed as a result of the tightness in his neck. The generator was re-enabled on (b)(6) 2012 to lower settings. It was noted that when the device was on 2. 0ma, the patient had reduced tension in neck and shoulders and felt better with a reduction in seizures. The patient has been recommend for speech/ vocal cord therapy for the dysphonia.

https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfmaude/detail.cfm?mdrfoi__id=2881243
Logged
dennis100
Moderators
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +24/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 61989


« Reply #22 on: December 19, 2018, 01:12:58 PM »

Model Number 304-20
Device Problem Adverse Event Without Identified Device or Use Problem
Event Date 09/05/2018
Event Type  Injury  
Event Description
It was reported that the patient was experiencing difficulty breathing, wheezing, and throat tightness for which the vns was disabled. The patient was referred to an ent doctor, and it was determined that the patient was experiencing vocal cord paresis that occurred with vns stimulation. There was no reported medical intervention being taken for the events. No additional or relevant information has been received to date.

https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfmaude/detail.cfm?mdrfoi__id=8021844
Logged
dennis100
Moderators
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +24/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 61989


« Reply #23 on: December 19, 2018, 01:14:53 PM »

Model Number 103
Event Date 05/15/2012
Event Type  Injury   
Event Description
On (b)(6) 2012, a surgeon's office reported that they had received a phone call from a patient's mother. The mother reported that the vns patient had been experiencing continual hoarseness, choking, blue lips, face redness, vomiting, and inflammation at the surgical site. The patient's mother stated that the device was turned on at the date of surgery. At first, the patient's coughing was mild; however, as the day progressed, the coughing and choking became worse. She reported that the patient was feeling anxiety and, as a result, pacing due to the side effects. She also stated that the patient feels "like her head is going to explode. " the mother also reported that the patient has not had a grand mal seizure in two years; however, she has had two grand mal seizures since implant and went to the emergency room. (the date of the hospital visit is unknown. ) the patient went in to see her neurologist and the settings were decreased; however, the symptoms continued. The patient returned to the neurologist on (b)(6) 2012 and the device was disabled; however, the magnet output current was intentionally not programmed to 0 ma, and the patient and mother were told to swipe the magnet if they felt a seizure coming on. On (b)(6) 2012, a physician's office reported that they had spoken to the patient's mother on this date. The mother reported that the neck incision was swollen (there was a somewhat hard bump there that hurt when touched). She also stated that each time the device stimulated, the patient felt like she was being choked, turned red, the lips turned blue, and she would vomit. When the patient spoke, the mother noticed that the nerves were "pulling at her upper lip. " on (b)(6) 2012, a voicemail was received from the neurologist. He stated that he saw the patient and disabled the output current, expect for magnet stimulation. The physician stated that the patient was problematic and could not tell if the patient had a lot of anxiety or if the events were actually occurring. He stated that the patient reported choking; however, he did not see this and thought her swallowing was normal. He also stated that the patient reported tightness in her throat and coughing. In addition, he stated that there is a little swelling at the neck incision that was typical for surgery and not alarming. On (b)(6) 2012, the neurologist reported the patient's wounds were fine; however the patient was very anxious about the device and wanted it removed. The neurologist suggested using vitamin e cream for the wounds and giving the healing process a chance. The neurologist believed that the device was still programmed to only deliver magnet stimulation. The neurologist also believed that it would be best to leave the device in for a few months, especially after wound healing. On (b)(6) 2012, a surgeon's office reported that the patient's anxiety made the mother become anxious and any little pin prick sensation caused them to call everywhere. Surgery is likely but has not taken place to date.

Manufacturer Narrative

Event Description
Attempts for additional information have been unsuccessful. Surgery is still likely, but has not occurred.

https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfmaude/detail.cfm?mdrfoi__id=2638613
Logged
dennis100
Moderators
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +24/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 61989


« Reply #24 on: December 19, 2018, 01:15:47 PM »

Model Number 103
Device Problem Adverse Event Without Identified Device or Use Problem
Event Date 11/12/2012
Event Type  Injury   
Manufacturer Narrative

Event Description
It was reported that the patient was having issues with the vns. It was stated that the patient was experiencing asthma, tightness, and a tight throat while attempting to eat during stimulation on times. The vns was previously disabled due to these events, but then was programmed back on. Follow up with the physician's office revealed that the patient stated that she previously had asthma when she was younger and was diagnosed with mild seasonal asthma, but that it had increased. It was unclear if the increase coincided with the implantation of the vns. It was reported that the patient was on oxygen and had a pre-existing pulmonary dysfunction and that the patient's test results were very abnormal. It was stated that the patient may have chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, or copd. The patient stated that she had difficulty swallowing with vns stimulation due to the tightness, but the patient also experienced difficulty breathing through her nose previously, which was why the patient was on oxygen. The patient stated that she was on oxygen immediately following the vns implantation surgery due the pulse ox readings being so bad. The patient was forced to discontinue oxygen use previously due to insurance issues, but upon recently getting back on oxygen, stated that she felt better. The patient had previously been on steroid inhalers and then an asthma disk. The patient reported that she sometimes anticipated the stimulation, would tense up, and then have difficulty swallowing or drinking. However, it was stated that when she was sitting, the patient was fine and did not even perceive stimulation. The patient felt that she anticipated the previous vns on time and that it was too long. The patient was referred for a swallowing study and would also have a ct scan. The patient's stimulation on and off times were reduced to shorter periods and the output currents were increased. No additional relevant information has been received to date.

https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfmaude/detail.cfm?mdrfoi__id=7299811
Logged
dennis100
Moderators
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +24/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 61989


« Reply #25 on: December 19, 2018, 01:17:51 PM »

Model Number 304-20
Event Date 02/18/2013
Event Type  Injury   
Event Description
It was reported that the patient was seen by another physician for a second opinion. It was reported that the patient had experienced a weight loss of 35 pounds due to the nausea, vomiting following vns implant surgery. The patient¿s device was programmed on in approximately (b)(6) 2013. System diagnostics were reportedly within normal limits (lead impedance ok and approximately 3,500 ohms. The patient reported that her symptoms have not changed since the device was programmed on. The physician believes that the symptoms are probably due to trauma to the nerve during the implantation as the surgery lasted approximately 5 hours. The physician felt that time will probably alleviate the symptoms. The physician informed the patient to come back in if the symptoms persist in 3-6 months.

Event Description
Further follow-up revealed that the patient's device was explanted "because she has had several problems since the device was placed. The physician's office also reported that the patient experienced excessive nausea, vomiting, tightness of the lead, choking sensations, coughing, and burning pain at the generator site. It was reported that the neurologist recommended removal of the vns system because the neurologist felt that the amount of problems the patient experienced did not seem to outweigh the benefits of having vns therapy. Attempts to obtain additional information have been unsuccessful to date. Attempts to have the explanted devices returned for analysis have been unsuccessful to date.

Event Description
Additional information was received that the patient's device is off, but she is complaining of pain "radiating throughout her whole body," the patient was scheduled to have either a lead revision or vns removal. Additionally, the patient claims that the lead going up to her neck is "too tight" and her device is flipping over. The patient showed the physician how she can manually manipulate it to "flip over. " additionally, it was also reported that the device could easily be manipulated in the pocket. The patient's device was explanted on (b)(6) 2013. The explanted device was discarded by the hospital after the surgery. Attempts have been made for additional information; however, they have been unsuccessful.

Event Description
The patient reported on social media that her vns caused to her almost die due to "catching fire" inside her, causing her to lose 58 pounds in 2 weeks, threw up blood every day for 2 months, and the wires were cut too short in her neck. It was previously reported that the patient felt a burning sensation at her chest, which is most likely what the patient meant by the device "catching fire" inside her. No further relevant information has been received to date.

Event Description
On (b)(6) 2013, it was reported that this vns patient was hospitalized after implant surgery due to a cough. The patient¿s device was not programmed on at the time. Follow-up showed that the condition was not pre-existing and not occurring with stimulation at the present time; however, it could not be determined if the event was related to vns. Currently, the coughing was not occurring with stimulation. It was stated that on occasion, the patient would cough and have a little bit of blood in her sputum. The patient also reported lead protrusion in the neck when turning her head to the right. The patient was seen and the lead appeared very tight when the patient turned her head. The generator was placed in the upper chest, under the clavicle, but the lead just may have been too short. The patient was referred to a surgeon for evaluation but this was for patient comfort. Surgery is likely but has not taken place.

Manufacturer Narrative

Event Description
Follow up with the physician found that he did not believe the choking was related to the vns. The choking was not associated with or occurring with stimulation. During explant, the patient's generator was found to be sutured to the fascia at implant with a non-absorbable suture. The physician believes the patient was manipulating the device. It did not appear that the device had migrated since implant. It was unknown when the device was turned off. The explant surgery was taken for patient comfort. The patient also felt the device was causing "electrical disturbances" in her house. The symptoms have improved since explant.

Manufacturer Narrative
Date received by manufacturer, corrected data: supplemental report #1 inadvertently listed the incorrect date of 05/22/2013, which should have been 06/18/2013 as it was a correction only. Follow-up type, corrected data: supplemental report #1 inadvertently did not list the report as a correction.

https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfmaude/detail.cfm?mdrfoi__id=3125097
Logged
dennis100
Moderators
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +24/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 61989


« Reply #26 on: December 19, 2018, 01:18:43 PM »

Model Number 105
Event Date 01/15/2015
Event Type  Injury   
Manufacturer Narrative

Event Description
It was reported that a recently implanted patient is having a hard time tolerating stimulation at around 0. 25mv - 0. 5ma. The patient experiences tightness in the chest, throat pain, and voice alteration and tachycardia associated with vns stimulation. Additional clinic notes were received for the patient. Clinic notes indicate that the patient was able to stop 3 seizures by swiping the magnet. When vns settings were increased from 0. 5 ma to 0. 75 ma, on (b)(6) 2015 the patient experienced mild palpitations and hoarseness of the voice with the increase but was reported to be able to tolerate it at the current level. Due to patient's concerns regarding discomfort with stimulation routinely (voice hoarseness, palpitations (tachycardia), chest discomfort and throat pain), the physician made a decision to decrease settings back to previous settings on (b)(6) 2015. Additional system diagnostic results was received. It was also reported that the patient continues to experience dysphagia when vns output current is increased to 0. 5 ma.

https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfmaude/detail.cfm?mdrfoi__id=4583522
Logged
dennis100
Moderators
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +24/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 61989


« Reply #27 on: December 19, 2018, 01:21:06 PM »

Model Number 105
Device Problem Adverse Event Without Identified Device or Use Problem
Event Date 03/15/2015
Event Type  Injury   
Event Description
It was reported that the vns patient was having unspecified cardiac issues and was referred for surgery to explant the device. No known surgical interventions have occurred to date. Attempts for additional relevant information have been unsuccessful to date.

Manufacturer Narrative
Date of explant; corrected data: the previously submitted mdr inadvertently provided the wrong explant date of the device.

Event Description
Additional information was received which indicated that the generator and lead were explanted on (b)(6) 2015. The explanted generator and lead have been returned to the manufacturer where analysis is currently underway. The nurse that initially reported the event provided additional information. The "heart problems" started on (b)(6) 2015. The patient had cough, shortness of breath, and chest tightness. Due to the chest tightness, she went to the er and was diagnoses with hyperkalemia, which she interpreted as a heart attack. This was not related to vns and no interventions were taken. The nurse also indicated that there was no actual arrhythmia. She stated that she does not think vns was causing any cardiac issues. She is not sure why the patient had pain, but the pain continued with the device off. The patient still complains of pain with the device removed.

Event Description
The patient's device was explanted on (b)(6) 2015. The explanted device has not been returned to date.

Manufacturer Narrative

Event Description
Product analysis was completed for the lead. There was no evidence to suggest an anomaly with the returned portion of the device. Since a portion of the lead assembly including the electrode array section was not returned for analysis, an evaluation and resulting commentary cannot be made on that portion of the lead. Product analysis was completed for the generator. There were no performance conditions found with the pulse generator. There was a device issue found which was unrelated to the reported adverse event. This issue will be reported in mfr. Report # 1644487-2015-05884.

https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfmaude/detail.cfm?mdrfoi__id=4876988
Logged
dennis100
Moderators
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +24/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 61989


« Reply #28 on: December 20, 2018, 02:03:58 AM »

Model Number 102
Event Date 07/19/2012
Event Type  Injury   
Event Description
On (b)(6) 2012, a vns treating physician reported that the vns patient was feeling sporadic stimulation and a tightening sensation. The patient went to the er on the evening of (b)(6), 2012 to have their vns checked and the neurologist on call disabled the device. The physician ran a system diagnostics test on (b)(6), 2012 and everything was within normal limits. The patient is being referred for prophylactic replacement. The physician later reported that the events were first observed on (b)(6), 2012. No causal or contributory programming or medication changes preceded the onset of the events. No patient manipulation or trauma occurred that is believed to have caused or contributed to the events. The physician stated that he believes the sporadic stimulation and tightening sensation are related to vns and occur with stimulation. The physician further indicated that the patient feels the tightening sensation/painful stimulation in the neck. The physician plans to replace the patient's generator as an intervention. The patient was scheduled for a battery replacement on (b)(6), 2012 and during surgery the surgeon accidently cut the lead. The battery was not replaced and the patient was re-scheduled for a complete revision surgery. Although surgery is likely, it has not occurred to date. A battery life calculation was performed which showed 1. 87 years remaining until eri=yes.

Event Description
Additional information was received on (b)(6) 2012, when product analysis was completed on the explanted generator. The septum was not cored, thus eliminating the possibility of a potential unintended electrical current path through body fluids, (addressing the allegations of "painful stimulation"). A comprehensive automated electrical evaluation showed that the pulse generator performed according to functional specifications. There were no performance or any other type of adverse conditions found with the pulse generator. Product analysis of the lead was completed on (b)(6) 2012. A large portion of the lead assembly body, including the electrodes, was not returned for analysis; therefore a complete evaluation could not be performed on the entire lead product. The ends of the outer/inner silicone tubes and quadfilar coils appeared to be cut. The condition of the returned lead portion is consistent with conditions that typically exist following an explant procedure. No obvious anomalies were noted except for the one and a half sets of setscrew marks found near the end of the connector pin indicating the lead had not been fully inserted into the cavity of the generator at one time. Continuity checks of the returned lead portion were performed, during the visual analysis, and no discontinuities were identified. There was no alleged or observed malfunction with the returned portion of the lead. What appeared to be remnants of dried body fluids were observed inside the outer and inner silicone tubes. No obvious path other than the cut ends made during the explant process. No observed product related anomalies were observed with the single returned lead portion; however a lead coil cut was observed.

Event Description
Additional information was received on (b)(6) 2012, when it was discovered that the patient underwent a revision surgery that day. On (b)(6) 2012, the patient's generator had been explanted and the surgeon accidently cut the lead in the process. At this point the surgeon decided to not implant a generator and closed the patient up. On (b)(6) 2012, the patient returned for surgery and a new lead and generator were implanted at this time. The generator had been replaced for prophylactic reasons. The explanted lead and generator were returned for product analysis on (b)(6) 2012. The lead impedance after surgery was noted to be within normal limits. Product analysis is still underway and has not yet been completed.

https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfmaude/detail.cfm?mdrfoi__id=2692931
Logged
dennis100
Moderators
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +24/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 61989


« Reply #29 on: January 25, 2019, 09:42:59 AM »

Model Number 302-20
Event Date 07/18/2014
Event Type  Malfunction   
Event Description
It was reported that device diagnostics resulted in high impedance. It was reported that the device was not programmed off after observing the high impedance. The patient was referred for surgery. Clinic notes dated (b)(6) 2014 indicated that patient reported feeling the device activate in the past, but now he has developed a sense of "tightness" in his neck when he extends his head and neck backwards. The patient notes discomfort over the left anterior triangle of his neck where the vns lead is located. It was noted that the patient's generator was reprogrammed to a signal on-time of 30 sec, the output current was increased gradually to 0. 5 ma and then 1. 0 ma. Surgery is likely, but has not occurred to date.
 
Event Description
Analysis of the generator was completed on 09/29/2014. The device performed according to functional specifications. Analysis in the pa lab concluded proper functionality of the pulse generator and that no abnormal performance or any other type of adverse condition was found.
 
Event Description
It was reported that the patient underwent generator and lead replacement. An implant card confirmed that the lead and generator were replaced due to lead discontinuity. Lead impedance with the new vns system was within normal limits. The explanted generator was received for analysis on 09/09/2014. Analysis is underway, but has not been completed to date.
 
Manufacturer Narrative
Device failure is suspected, but did not cause or contribute to a death or serious injury.

https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfmaude/detail.cfm?mdrfoi__id=4010236
Logged
dennis100
Moderators
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +24/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 61989


« Reply #30 on: January 25, 2019, 09:44:26 AM »

Model Number 105
Event Date 07/13/2014
Event Type  Injury   
Event Description
It was reported that the vns patient went to the er on (b)(6) 2014 because the patient was unable to disable her device. The patient was experiencing chest pain, voice alteration, and tightening of the chest. It was later determined that the reason why the patient was unable to disable her device with her magnet was likely due to improper technique. The patient stated she also had bradycardia while in the er. The patient¿s device was disabled, but the patient continued to experience voice alteration and shortness of breath. The physician stated that these issues were not related to vns. Ekg and ct were reported to be normal except for the bradycardia. The relationship between the bradycardia and vns is unknown. The patient was referred to see a cardiologist. The patient¿s device was disabled prior to being discharged. The patient¿s parent stated that the patient¿s blood work was abnormal; however, it is unclear what was abnormal with the blood work results. Attempts for additional relevant information have been unsuccessful to date.
 
Event Description
The explanting facility discarded the explanted device; therefore, no analysis can be performed.
 
Event Description
Clinic notes were received indicating that the vns patient was scheduled to undergo surgery on (b)(6) 2014 to explant her device. The patient had been hospitalized due to vomiting, diarrhea, sinus bradycardia, and voice hoarseness. The patient was given new medication and her device was disabled. It was noted that the patient¿s voice issues continued despite device disablement. The patient¿s device was tested and showed normal device function. The patient was seen by a cardiologist who determined that the patient had a history of nighttime bradycardia. The patient stated that she also had recently experienced bradycardia during the daytime. The patient had a history of chronic chest pain and was unable to tolerate stimulation at high settings due to the chest pain. The patient wanted her device explanted because it was uncomfortable and reportedly did not help with her seizures. Follow-up revealed that the patient¿s anxiety, nausea, voice alteration, vomiting and diarrhea were all related to vns stimulation. As the patient¿s device settings were increased, the patient¿s bradycardia had worsened and the patient was a non-responder to vns. The neurosurgeon stated that the patient did not have a prior history of cardiac events nor any pre-existing conditions susceptible to cardiac events. Additionally, the neurosurgeon indicated that the patient developed bradycardia following implant surgery. The patient underwent surgery on (b)(6) 2014 to explant her device. The explanted device has not been returned to date.

https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfmaude/detail.cfm?mdrfoi__id=4013497
Logged
dennis100
Moderators
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +24/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 61989


« Reply #31 on: January 27, 2019, 10:04:31 AM »

Model Number 304-20
Event Date 03/07/2014
Event Type  Injury   
Event Description
Further follow-up revealed that the patient was not reimplanted. It was reported that the patient reported neck tightness and pulling at the nerve attachment site of the lead.
 
Manufacturer Narrative
Only a portion of the lead was returned for analysis, which did not revealed any anomalies.
 
Event Description
It was reported that the patient underwent generator and lead explant due to painful stimulation. The generator and lead were received for analysis. Analysis of the lead was completed on (b)(4) 2014. Note that since the electrode array portion was not returned for analysis, an evaluation and resulting commentary cannot be made on that portion of the lead. Other than typical wear and explant related observations, no anomalies were identified in the returned lead portion. Analysis of the generator was completed on (b)(4) 2014. The septum was not cored, thus eliminating the possibility of a potential unintended electrical current path through body fluids. A comprehensive automated electrical evaluation showed that the pulse generator performed according to functional specifications. There were no performance or any other type of adverse conditions found with the pulse generator. No additional relevant information havs been received to date.

https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfmaude/detail.cfm?mdrfoi__id=4128688
Logged
dennis100
Moderators
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +24/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 61989


« Reply #32 on: February 03, 2019, 04:04:03 PM »

Model Number 103
Event Date 05/01/2011
Event Type  Injury   
Manufacturer Narrative
(b)(4).
 
Event Description
On (b)(6) 2013 it was reported that due to the patient's experience with irregular heart rhythms the cardiologist did an ablation. Following the ablation the patient began to have a low heart rate and a pacemaker was implanted. After having the pacemaker implanted the patient started to become dizzy, sleepy, with trouble eating (weight loss), and vomits with dizziness. It was also reported that the patient experienced their shoulder and neck tightening up when they swiped the vns magnet across the generator. Good faith attempts are currently being performed.
 
Event Description
Follow up with the physician found that he was not under the impression that the patient's complaints of experiencing irregular heart rhythms, dizziness (which led to vomiting), sleepiness, inability to eat (leading to weight loss), or tightening of shoulder and neck area were related to the patient's vns. The physician stated that the patient has had extended periods in which he was asymptomatic with his device turned on, and, conversely, he has reported the above symptoms with his device disabled. It is the physician's understanding that the patient is currently undergoing a cardiac workup to explore a cardiovascular etiology for his complaints. Lastly, the physician stated that as he believes none of the patient's problems are caused by his vns, he is unable to provide any additional information.

https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfmaude/detail.cfm?mdrfoi__id=3212285
Logged
dennis100
Moderators
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +24/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 61989


« Reply #33 on: February 04, 2019, 03:10:31 AM »

Model Number 102R
Event Date 04/01/2014
Event Type  Injury   
Event Description
Additional information was received that the patient underwent replacement of the generator and lead on (b)(6) 2014. The portion of the lead that was explanted was discarded by the explant facility. The explanted generator was received on (b)(6) 2015. In the pa lab, the device output signal was monitored for more than 24-hrs, while the generator was placed in a simulated body temperature environment. Results showed no signs of variation in the pulse generator¿s output signal and demonstrated that the device provided the expected level of output current for the entire monitoring period. The pulse generator diagnostics were as expected for the programmed parameters. In addition, the septum was not cored, thus eliminating the possibility of a potential unintended electrical current path through body fluids. During the product analysis, there were no anomalies found with the pulse generator.
 
Manufacturer Narrative

Event Description
It was reported that the vns patient began experiencing pain in her chest during stimulation on-times after falling into a glass table. The pain resolved when the magnet was used to temporarily disable the device. The device was programmed off during an office visit on (b)(6) 2014. Diagnostic results did not indicate any issues with the patient¿s device. The patient previously reported occasional tightness in her chest, erratic stimulation and stimulation on-times not perceived. The patient was referred for surgery but no known surgical interventions have occurred to date.

https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfmaude/detail.cfm?mdrfoi__id=4262629
Logged
dennis100
Moderators
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +24/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 61989


« Reply #34 on: February 09, 2019, 04:03:23 AM »

Model Number 104
Device Problem Adverse Event Without Identified Device or Use Problem
Event Date 12/20/2018
Event Type  Injury   
Event Description
Information was received that the patient's device was spontaneously going into magnet mode whether the device was enabled or disabled the patient was reported have painful stimulation and tightness at the generator site. It was also reported that the device was cycling every seven seconds despite parameter changes. Diagnostics from the physician was reported to be fine. Information was later received that the patient's generator was replaced. No additional relevant information has been received to date.

https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfmaude/detail.cfm?mdrfoi__id=8265182
Logged
dennis100
Moderators
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +24/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 61989


« Reply #35 on: February 13, 2019, 03:04:56 AM »

Model Number 102R
Event Date 01/12/2015
Event Type  Injury   
Manufacturer Narrative

Event Description
Clinic notes were received indicating that the magnet mode output current for the vns patient¿s device was decreased because magnet mode stimulation on-times caused the patient¿s seizures to last longer. The patient achieved seizure reduction with increased duty cycle and better tolerance with decreased normal mode output current. It was noted that the patient was coughing and had tightness in the throat during stimulation on-times. No further information relevant to the event has been received to date.

https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfmaude/detail.cfm?mdrfoi__id=4524304
Logged
dennis100
Moderators
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +24/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 61989


« Reply #36 on: February 14, 2019, 02:23:45 AM »

Model Number 104
Event Date 04/01/2015
Event Type  Injury   
Manufacturer Narrative
Conclusions; corrected data: the code was incorrectly reported on the initial mfr. Report.
 
Event Description
It was originally reported that the patient was experiencing pain in the neck at the site of the electrodes and in the chest at the site of the generator. The generator was programmed off on (b)(6) 2015. It was reported that the patient underwent surgery to replace the generator on (b)(6) 2015. Pre-operation diagnostic results were checked on the original generator and lead and the results were within normal range. Once the new generator was attached to the original lead, diagnostics were checked and impedance was above normal range. The pin of the original lead was reinserted into the generator and during this process the lead broke. The broken lead is reported under mfr. Report # 1644487-2015-04830. It was noted by the surgeons that the original placement of the lead was not well done and seemed "tight" (no slack) before the lead finally broke. Due to the lead break, a full revision was performed and diagnostics were run and the results were within acceptable ranges. The generator and lead have not been received to date.

https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfmaude/detail.cfm?mdrfoi__id=4816140
Logged
dennis100
Moderators
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +24/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 61989


« Reply #37 on: February 26, 2019, 02:26:12 AM »

Model Number 300-20
Device Problems Corroded ; Fluid Leak; Connection Problem
Event Date 05/12/2012
Event Type  Malfunction   
Event Description
Product analysis (pa) for the returned generator was completed. A comprehensive automated electrical evaluation showed the generator performed according to functional specifications, with the exception of the test "backup cap neg to can", which has already been captured in mfr. Report 1644487-2017-03534. There were no additional performance or any other type of adverse conditions found with the generator. Pa for the returned lead was completed. Allegations of lead fractures were confirmed. The electrodes were not returned for analysis; therefore, a complete evaluations could not be performed on the entire lead product. During the visual analysis, the outer silicone tubing appeared to be twisted and compressed in several areas. Fractures were identified and scanning electron microscopy found that they were stress induced fractures. Additionally, pitting was observed on the surface of some of the breaks. Abraded openings found on the outer silicone tubing most likely provided the leakage path for the dried remnants of what appeared to have once been body fluids inside the outer silicone tubing. What appeared to be white deposits were observed in various locations. Energy dispersion spectroscopy was performed on one of the deposits and identified the deposit as containing silicon, phosphorus, sodium, magnesium, and calcium. With the exception of the observed discontinuities and the abraded openings, the condition of the returned lead portions is consistent with conditions that typically exist following an explant procedure. No other obvious anomalies were noted. Based on the findings in the pa lab, there is evidence to suggest discontinuities in the returned portion of the device, which may have contributed to the stated allegations of lead fractures. Note that since the electrode array section was not returned, an evaluation and resulting commentary cannot be made on that portion of the lead.
 
Manufacturer Narrative
Manufacturer reviewed x-rays of implanted device. Review of x-rays by the manufacturer revealed a gross lead discontinuity. Device failure occurred, but did not cause or contribute to a death or serious injury.
 
Event Description
It was reported the patient has been referred for replacement surgery; however, no surgical intervention has taken place to date.
 
Event Description
Clinic notes dated (b)(6) 2015 note that the patient and her mother feel that the vns was injured or disconnected the year prior and that device diagnostics were within normal limits. It was noted that there was a tightness in the lead that the neurologist was concerned about. The surgeon noted that there is no unusual tightness of the lead. An x-rays assessment was received indicating that the lead wire was disconnected from the device in the left neck. It was reported that device diagnostics performed on (b)(6) 2014 were within normal limits (1704 ohms). The neurologist believes that scar tissue is the reason for the lead tightness feeling that the patient experiences. The neurologist indicated that the patient's parents have asked for the generator and lead to be replaced. X-rays were sent to manufacturer for review. X-rays identified that the lead appeared to be fractured near the electrodes. It was later reported that high impedance was observed and that revision surgery was planned. A fluoroscopy was performed by the surgeon who found that the lead could not be seen clearly and concluded that the lead may have never been connected. Recent diagnostics were found in the physician's programming system that showed that device diagnostics were within normal limits at one time which showed that the device was at one time connected. The patient was seen on (b)(6) 2015 at which time device diagnostics were within normal limits. It was reported that the device was functioning normally and was programmed back on. The cause of the diagnostics being within normal limits is a believed short circuit situation with the patient's tissue. A device decoder was performed which identified that the lead break likely occurred as early as (b)(6) 2012. The patient was referred back to surgeon. No known surgical interventions have occurred to date.
 
Manufacturer Narrative
Age at time of event; corrected data: this information was inadvertently reported incorrectly on initial mfr. Report.
 
Event Description
The explanted generator and lead were received by the manufacturer on 03/02/2017. While analysis is expected, it has not been completed to date.
 
Event Description
Additional x-rays were sent to the manufacturer for review. X-rays identified that the lead appeared to be fractured near the electrodes confirming a lead break.
 
Event Description
The patient underwent a full vns revision on (b)(6) 2016. It was noted when the lead was removed, it appeared to be fractured and the lead wires were twisted together. Attempts for additional relevant information have been unsuccessful to date.

https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfmaude/detail.cfm?mdrfoi__id=4749594
Logged
dennis100
Moderators
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +24/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 61989


« Reply #38 on: March 18, 2019, 02:19:31 AM »

Model Number 103
Device Problems Generator; Loss of or Failure to Bond; Migration or Expulsion of Device ; Material Protrusion / Extrusion; Lead
Event Date 04/07/2015
Event Type  Injury   
Event Description
It was reported that the vns patient's generator had migrated under her armpit a few weeks ago and causing pain at the generator site. The generator later moved back to the original implant site but it was noted that leads were protruding at the generator and electrode sites. The patient underwent surgery on (b)(6) 2015 to reposition the device. During the procedure, the surgeon did not observe a suture securing the lead. Patient manipulation or trauma is not believed to have caused or contributed to the event.
 
Event Description
It was reported that the vns patient continued that have issues following repositioning surgery. The patient stated that her neck area was still tight and painful. She described the issue had started as a small lump in her throat but then became ¿the size of a golf ball¿ that caused pain when eating, swallowing, or moving her neck/throat. Follow-up with the surgeon¿s office revealed that the patient had a post-operative appointment on (b)(6) 2015, and no issues were noted at the patient¿s neck region. Attempts for additional relevant information have been unsuccessful to date.

https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfmaude/detail.cfm?mdrfoi__id=5253695
Logged
dennis100
Moderators
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +24/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 61989


« Reply #39 on: March 23, 2019, 12:27:27 AM »

Model Number 302-20
Device Problems Break; Disconnection
Event Date 11/02/2015
Event Type  Malfunction   
Event Description
On (b)(6) 2015 the patient had full replacement surgery. The implant card received states that the lead was also replaced for lead discontinuity. It was stated that during surgery the lead appeared to be tethered. The surgeon could tell it did not look right, that it seemed tight so he made the call to replace the lead. The site explanted the lead after surgery.
 
Event Description
Product analysis for the generator was completed and approved on (b)(6) 2015. The generator battery was confirmed to be depleted due to normal current consumption. The end of service condition was the result of normal, expected battery depletion based on the battery life calculation, the electrical test results and the bench evaluation. The device performed according to functional specifications.

https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfmaude/detail.cfm?mdrfoi__id=5289083
Logged
dennis100
Moderators
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +24/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 61989


« Reply #40 on: March 24, 2019, 03:05:58 AM »

Model Number 106
Device Problem Insufficient Information
Event Date 11/02/2015
Event Type  Injury   
Event Description
It was reported that a patient, recently implanted with vns system, had pain and hoarseness. The patient was stating that it was tight and hurting a lot. It was reported that the patient was seen by a nurse and her physician, where she received antibiotics because the incision looked red. But the patient's throat was sore and her voice was still hoarse. It was reported by the nurse that the device had not been turned on yet, so the pain and soreness was likely a result of the surgery. Further information received indicates that the patient was again seen in clinic and she was doing well; the pain has stopped and her wound was dry. The patient's voice has been settled. It was reported that the device is now turned on. Review of manufacturing records confirmed that the generator passed all functional tests prior to distribution. The device history records showed that the generator was sterilized prior to distribution. No additional relevant information has been received to date.
 
Manufacturer Narrative
Additional manufacturer narrative and/or corrected data, corrected data: (b)(4). The suspect device udi was inadvertently not provided in the initial mdr.

https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfmaude/detail.cfm?mdrfoi__id=5260052
Logged
dennis100
Moderators
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +24/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 61989


« Reply #41 on: March 28, 2019, 08:29:54 AM »

Model Number 103
Event Date 06/01/2015
Event Type  Injury   
Event Description
It was reported the patient was scheduled for a full revision on (b)(6) 2016. The full replacement is planned because the physician thought there may be something wrong with the system; however, impedance was not high. An x-ray was taken which was reportedly fine. When the vns was programmed off, because the physician thought there was a lead issue, the patient had an increase in seizures, so the device was programmed back on. The patient's family indicated the issue may be related to karate, but there were no issues on what was wrong with the device. It was noted the x-rays would not be released to the manufacturer. Clinic notes were received due to the replacement referral. It was noted the patient sustained an injury during karate sometime in (b)(6). Since the injury in (b)(6) 2015, the patient had intermittently experienced tightness and discomfort in his left pectoral region. The tightness is described as squeezing and occurs every five minutes though this was not observed by the physician while the patient was being evaluated on (b)(6) 2015. The physician was able to recreate the pain by palpating the tissue overlying the vns generator. Diagnostic testing showed an impedance value of 2083 ohms and an ifi = no condition. It was also mentioned at the visit on (b)(6) 2015 that the last pain the patient experienced was 4 days ago. On (b)(6) 2015, the physician decided to program the vns off to attempt to isolate the cause of the pain. It was later noted in clinic notes dated (b)(6) 2016 that the patient's seizures worsened after programming the vns off. Due to the worsening of seizures, the vns was programmed back on. The physician further described he believed the pain was mechanical because the pain does not occur with stimulation, but the pain did occur when the physician palpated the device. Based on this information, along with the impedance value that is within normal limits, the physician believes there is no malfunction with the lead, and only a generator replacement will be needed. The physician explained his plan to revise the generator pocket and secure the new generator more robustly than typical to prevent migration laterally, which is believed to be the etiology of the patient's discomfort. No known surgical intervention has occurred to date. Attempts for additional relevant information have been unsuccessful to date.
 
Manufacturer Narrative
Age at time of event; this information was inadvertently incorrectly reported on the initial mfr. Report. Outcomes attributed to adverse event; this information was inadvertently incorrectly reported on the initial mfr. Report.
 
Event Description
It was reported, through the receipt of an implant card, the patient had generator replacement on (b)(6) 2016 due to mechanical discomfort.

https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfmaude/detail.cfm?mdrfoi__id=5446691
Logged
dennis100
Moderators
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +24/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 61989


« Reply #42 on: April 01, 2019, 01:02:32 AM »

Event Date 01/01/1990
Event Type  Injury   
Event Description
An article titled "complications and safety of vagus nerve stimulation ¿ 25 years¿ experience at a single center¿ was published and the abstract was reviewed, which included adverse events involving 14 vns patients. In many procedures performed between 1990 and 2014, patients suffered from complications related to vns surgery. It was reported that patient underwent reoperation 3 months after primary implant with lead placement correction because of discomfort and tightness on the throat.

https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfmaude/detail.cfm?mdrfoi__id=5691203
Logged
dennis100
Moderators
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +24/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 61989


« Reply #43 on: April 02, 2019, 01:24:37 AM »

Event Type  Malfunction   
Event Description
It was reported that a vns patient with tuberous sclerosis complex had a lead break. It was reported that the patient had a new generator recently implanted. The lead became too tight and has now snapped after the patient contracted whooping cough and possibly pulled it with the extreme coughing. It was reported that the patient's seizures have increased due to that suspected lead break. It was reported that the patient's generator was switched off. No known surgical interventions have been performed to date. No additional relevant information has been received to date.

https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfmaude/detail.cfm?mdrfoi__id=5675255
Logged
dennis100
Moderators
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +24/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 61989


« Reply #44 on: April 08, 2019, 02:32:13 AM »

Model Number 302-20
Device Problem Adverse Event Without Identified Device or Use Problem
Event Date 01/01/2017
Event Type  Injury   
Event Description
The patient reported she developed tautness in the lead wire and underwent surgery to remove part of the coil. Multiple follow up attempts were performed with the patient's last known follow up physician and the implanting surgeon but no additional or relevant information has been received to date.

https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfmaude/detail.cfm?mdrfoi__id=8401190
Logged
dennis100
Moderators
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +24/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 61989


« Reply #45 on: April 12, 2019, 01:20:06 AM »

Model Number 250
Event Date 07/14/2016
Event Type  Malfunction   
Event Description
It was reported by the company representative that the patient had come in for a vns replacement surgery. Upon interrogation of the device, the settings were found to be indicative of a faulted diagnostic test. It was explained to the surgeon that the settings found during interrogation were indicative of a faulted diagnostic test. The neurologist's physician's assistant was notified and stated the last time the checked the device was (b)(6) 2016 and he was able to provide the intended settings. The physician's assistant noted that when performing diagnostics on that date, the patient had a weird tightening sensation in her chest, so the diagnostics were interrupted. Due to the patient's tightness, they were unable to perform a final interrogation to verify the settings. It was explained to the physicians at that time that the patient would have been programmed at the unintended settings since (b)(6) 2016 until the day of surgery (2 weeks). After the implant was complete, the surgeon decided to program the patient back to the intended settings.

https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfmaude/detail.cfm?mdrfoi__id=5913259
Logged
dennis100
Moderators
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +24/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 61989


« Reply #46 on: April 21, 2019, 03:42:35 AM »

Model Number 302-30
Event Date 10/31/2016
Event Type  Malfunction   
Event Description
It was reported the patient was seen by her physician and high impedance was observed on the vns. The patient was referred for full revision. The vns was programmed off. It was noted the patient had a seizure in (b)(6) 2016 and fell off her toilet and smashed her head on the floor resulting in a laceration. Since that point, the patient had felt a tightening in her throat when the device stimulated. The patient underwent full revision surgery on (b)(6) 2016. The surgeon noted that he identified an area in the lead which was damaged and replaced the lead. The generator was noted to be a prophylactic replacement.

https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfmaude/detail.cfm?mdrfoi__id=6117676
Logged
dennis100
Moderators
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +24/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 61989


« Reply #47 on: May 03, 2019, 02:28:41 AM »

Model Number 102
Device Problem Adverse Event Without Identified Device or Use Problem
Event Date 05/25/2011
Event Type  Injury   
Event Description
It was reported via clinic notes that a vns patient was experiencing an increase in seizures. The patient was referred for surgery. The physician stated the generator was interrogated and confirmed the device "is functioning well". Follow-up from the patient on (b)(6) 2017 also provide that she has had issues with different seizure types and frequency since last replacement. She stated seizures now happen every 2 weeks when they were happening every 4-5 weeks, lasting up to 2. 5 minutes and her recovery can be up to a week. Follow-up from the physician provided that the most recent diagnostics were normal with no error and the device was not at end of battery life. The patient¿s husband has reported increasing seizure frequency and severity past 3-6 months. The physician provided it is unclear if the increase in seizures was related to vns and mentioned the device is likely needing replacement. There is high suspicion for non-epileptic seizures co-existing with her epilepsy. Battery status indicator was reported to be normal. The change in seizure pattern and post-ictal duration is unclear if it is related to vns. It is suspected that the patient has pnes (psychogenic non-epileptic seizures) as well. Additional relevant information has not been received to-date. No known surgery has occurred to-date.
 
Event Description
Follow-up from the patient provided that she was still experiencing seizures and that she can no longer feel the magnet swipe.
 
Event Description
Follow-up from the patient provided that the generator has migrated close to her armpit due to her weight loss and is bothersome. The patient reports that she has had increased seizures within the last year and does not feel the vns is working. The patient also stated she had a really rough week as she has had a lot of seizures.
 
Event Description
It was reported by the patient that her device was turning on every 10 seconds, and staying on for about 10 seconds. The stimulation was very strong and painful and making it difficult to swallow. She reported that generator location makes it difficult to access with the magnet to disable the device. It was indicated by the surgeon that the patient's replacement surgery was due to battery depletion and her migration would be fixed at this time. Per the surgeon, the surgery was not to preclude a serious injury. No surgical intervention has occurred to date. No further relevant information has been received to date.
 
Event Description
It was reported that the patient underwent replacement due to battery depletion. The explanted product was returned. The patient reported that she had been having sleep apnea, buzzing in her neck during sleep since 2011. She also indicated that she had felt stronger stimulation in her neck and that she gagged with magnet swipes which had led to weight-loss in the past. The patient's treating physician indicated that this patient was a high anxiety patient. It was found that the patient had multiple complaints requiring investigations of increased seizures, pain with stimulation, dysphagia with stimulation, and perception of stimulation since 2011 that were previously considered separate events. Three reports regarding seizures of this patient were submitted since 2011. In mfr. Report #1644487-2012-00443, the patient reported that she'd had an increase in seizures in january 2012, a tightness in her neck, a decreased range of motion of her neck, and pain and clicking in her throat with stimulation. The physician said that the patient's increased seizures were not related to vns. The physician stated that he believed that the patient¿s pain and ¿tightness¿ or limited range of movement, were psychiatric in nature and not related to vns. In (b)(6) 2015, mfr. Report #1644487-2015-04964, captures a report from the patient that she had a new type of seizure while having her vns settings adjusted. This seizure was later indicated not to be related by the physician and the physician indicated that the patient's seizures had decreased in severity since having the vns. Mfr. Report #1644487-2015-05446 reported that in (b)(6) 2015 the patient had experienced an increase in seizures due to her "levels being low. " the physician indicated that the patient had an extremely variable seizure pattern and that her history is not reliable. Further relevant information to these reports will be captured in the current manufacturing report as these reports appear to be related. No further relevant information has been received to date.
 
Manufacturer Narrative
Describe event or problem, corrected data: supplemental mdr 4 inadvertently reported that the generator was returned when it was actually discarded.
 
Event Description
The physician indicated that the relationship of the following symptoms---sleep apnea, buzzing in neck, stronger stimulation in her neck, and gagging with magnet swipes which had led to weight-loss in the past--- was unknown. The patient's explanted product was discarded. No further relevant information has been received to date.

https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfmaude/detail.cfm?mdrfoi__id=6434722
Logged
dennis100
Moderators
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +24/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 61989


« Reply #48 on: May 03, 2019, 02:29:30 AM »

Model Number 304-20
Device Problems Adverse Event Without Identified Device or Use Problem; Insufficient Information
Event Date 03/08/2017
Event Type  Malfunction   
Event Description
It was reported that a patient was having lead problems related to her clotting disorder. The patient believed that her physician told her that this was the case and stated that she needed to undergo full revision surgery to resolve the issue. No further relevant information has been provided to date. No surgical intervention has occurred to date.
 
Event Description
The patient underwent generator replacement surgery. The lead was not replaced as the surgeon reportedly did not feel it necessary to replace the lead. No additional relevant information has been provided to date.
 
Event Description
It was reported that the patient was actually experiencing a tethering sensation accompanied by pain and discomfort when she turned her head. The lead was only repositioned during generator replacement surgery. The lead repositioning was for patient comfort. The surgeon believed that scar tissue formation, and not a clotting disorder, was the cause of the patient's lead issues. No additional relevant information has been provided to date.

https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfmaude/detail.cfm?mdrfoi__id=6449279
Logged
dennis100
Moderators
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +24/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 61989


« Reply #49 on: May 06, 2019, 03:38:15 AM »

Model Number 302-20
Event Date 11/01/2009
Event Type  Injury   
Event Description
It was reported that a vns pt experienced pain during stimulation at the neck site. The pt had recently had a full system replacement as she was initially implanted in 2009 and shortly after surgery, she developed vocal cord paralysis. The vocal cord paralysis is now resolved, but the pt presented pain. Additional information was received from the treating physician indicating the pt was having muscle spasms with stimulation and the probable cause was vns implantation which topped connective tissue in the sternocleidomastoid muscle. The implantation of vns gave massive tension and spasms in the muscle at each stimulation of vns. Interventions taken were to reduce the pt's settings (decrease pulse width to 130 usec) to ameliorate the event. Moreover, the physician stated the pt reported horner syndrome and recurrence paresis in (b) (6) 2009 directly after initial vns implant. At the moment surgical intervention has not been planned and good faith attempts to obtain additional information have been unsuccessful to date. At the moment the muscle spasms are not present anymore and were related to stimulation as parameters were reduced.

https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfmaude/detail.cfm?mdrfoi__id=1779177
Logged
dennis100
Moderators
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +24/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 61989


« Reply #50 on: May 07, 2019, 07:23:00 AM »

Model Number 302-20
Event Date 01/01/2010
Event Type  Injury   
Event Description
Upon further follow up with the nurse, it was revealed that the patient is experiencing pain and a "shocking sensation in chest due to wires being bunched up". The lead appears to be protruding from mid-neck to the collarbone with a "knot" felt at the lead body. The only intervention taken to date is assessment by the surgeon. Both the surgeon and the treating vns physician tested the device, and it was reported to be working okay. The patient's severe body spasms are believed to be the likely cause of the lead protrusion and caused the extreme pain and feeling of being shocked. No other physiological changes are believed to have contributed to the lead protrusion. Since the surgeon is afraid the lead wires may break if not replaced and due to the length of implant, the patient is referred for full revision surgery. Although surgery is likely, it has not occurred to date.
 
Event Description
It was reported on (b)(6) 2013, that the patient is experiencing lead wires "bulging" accompanied with tension/pain in the neck that occurred right after she had a severe episode of body spasms about 10 days prior. The patient has a variety of physical illnesses, one of which includes these body spasms. The treating rn believed the body spasms may have been experienced as an extreme case due to stress as the patient was on her way to her brother's funeral. She also thought that the protrusion was due to the spasms that the patient experienced. The rn also mentioned that the patient's depression had been worsening recently, but that she believes that the patient's stress (brother passing away, dog being ill) have contributed to this recent increase in depression. The patient was evaluated again by the treating vns psychiatrist on (b)(6) 2013. Diagnostics on the patient's vns are within normal limits. The psychiatrist reports that the lead "bulging out a little bit like a vein" but was unsure if this bulge has always been there all along. Later, it was reported that the patient has also been experiencing pain and swelling in the tongue due to little cuts on her tongue which occurs with stimulation, and the surgeon believes this is related to vns. The patient has been experiencing this for a while; however, it has worsened lately with the other events. The treating rn did not have further details at that time. Clinic notes from the surgeon dated (b)(6) 2013, indicate that the patient complains of tension/pain in the left neck/leads and had been worsening over the past few years. The surgeon indicated in the notes that he can offer operation for lead revision for severe excess lead tension and generator change for end of life which the patient agreed. The patient was scheduled for surgery for possible generator and lead revision due to pain and swelling with stimulation. The surgeon reportedly believes the patient does not need an x-ray because he can see the wires bunched "where it goes into the vns. " as of (b)(6) 2013, the rn reported the patient indicates that she has a "white line in her skin going along the vagal nerve" and a knot at the electrode site which the patient and physician can feel. The rn also indicated that the patient has a lot of accompanying medical, physical and psychological problems. Although surgery is likely, it has not occurred to date. Attempts for additional information from the treating psychiatrist's office ( rn) have been unsuccessful to date. Follow up with the surgeon's office revealed that per the psychiatrist's notes, the patient "denies any pain or discomfort from vns. She has been diagnosed with major depression disorder and major psychotic disorder which may be a psychotic manifestation of her symptoms. Would like to rule out psychotic or psychological disorder. " the nurse indicated that the surgeon appears to be due to not to preclude a serious injury as the notes indicate that she denies pain or discomfort and the symptoms appear to be thought to be related to her other mental/physician illnesses. However, it remains unclear at this time.
 
Manufacturer Narrative

 
Manufacturer Narrative
The initial report inadvertently reported the age incorrectly as the date of event was listed incorrectly. The initial report inadvertently reported the event date incorrectly as it was reported that the tension and pain in the neck was worsening over the past couple of years.

https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfmaude/detail.cfm?mdrfoi__id=3027374
Logged
dennis100
Moderators
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +24/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 61989


« Reply #51 on: May 07, 2019, 07:23:56 AM »

Model Number 105
Device Problem Adverse Event Without Identified Device or Use Problem
Event Date 01/01/2017
Event Type  Injury   
Event Description
It was reported via clinic notes received that the patient was experiencing pain in the left neck up to the ear with vns stimulation that was described as a burning sensation. The patient has concurrent ear problems that are being treated by the pcp, but the patient noted this burning as independent of the ear problems. It was also noted that the patient's generator had migrated, which created tension on the vns lead, resulting in protrusion, a lead pulling sensation, and discomfort. The patient was referred for vns replacement surgery. Follow up with the physician's office revealed that the intervention was for both the patient's comfort and to preclude serious injury. No relevant surgery is known to have occurred to date. No additional relevant information has been received to date.
 
Event Description
The patient underwent vns generator replacement surgery. The explanting facility, historically, does not return explanted products.

https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfmaude/detail.cfm?mdrfoi__id=7572226
Logged
dennis100
Moderators
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +24/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 61989


« Reply #52 on: May 07, 2019, 07:24:55 AM »

Model Number 103
Event Date 12/10/2015
Event Type  Injury   
Manufacturer Narrative

Event Description
On (b)(6) 2016 it was reported that the patient felt a lump and tension in the neck and generator site. This was reported as beginning the day after the last appointment on (b)(6) 2015. It is believed that the device may have migrated which was causing the difficulty interrogating the patient previously. It was noted that the patient was able to be successfully interrogated at this visit. Diagnostics were noted to be within normal limits and ifi-no. The patient has been referred to the surgeon for consult. The patient underwent a prophylactic replacement on (b)(6) 2016. The pre-op diagnostics were within normal limits and ifi-no. The patient had complaints of pulling sensation and migration of generator. The lead was reported to be uncoiled and the generator only was replaced. During surgery it had appeared that the generator had dropped in the chest and it looked like the lead was coiled almost as if the patient had manipulated the device but it was stated the patient did not. It was confirmed that non-absorbable sutures were used to secure the previous generator. The reported lump that the patient felt was determined to be the coiled lead in the chest. The lead pulling sensation was thought to be due to the generator dropping in the chest (reason is not known as manipulation or trauma is not suspected) and due to the lead being coiled (also reason unknown). The explanted generator has not been received to date.

https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfmaude/detail.cfm?mdrfoi__id=5413064
Logged
dennis100
Moderators
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +24/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 61989


« Reply #53 on: May 07, 2019, 07:26:02 AM »

Model Number 304-20
Event Date 01/21/2016
Event Type  Malfunction   
Manufacturer Narrative
Suspect device udi#: (b)(4).
 
Event Description
It was reported by the physician that the patient developed twitching in her neck with the use of the vns magnet. The physician suspects the twitching is due to a lead fracture and has advised the patient not to use the magnet as the patient has no other symptoms and the normal vns output current is not causing the same symptoms as magnet use. Settings were adjusted due to the discomfort with the magnet stimulation, which occurred prior to the observance of the muscle twitching. No settings were changed due to the reported muscle twitching.
 
Event Description
The patient underwent vns explant surgery. During attempts at product return, it was revealed that the facility, historically, does not return explanted products.
 
Manufacturer Narrative
Describe event or problem, corrected data: follow-up report #1 inadvertently left out information. (b)(4).
 
Event Description
Clinic notes were received by the manufacturer and indicated that the patient had difficulties with pain at the neck and chest where the vns was implanted. It was stated that she developed issues with tension at the neck when trying to do sit-ups. When the vns activated, she experienced contractions of the laryngeal musculature. The patient reported twitching in her neck muscles with magnet stimulation. The vns magnet mode was programmed off. It was stated that since the magnet mode was disabled, the patient was getting the warning for complex partial seizures for shorter lengths of time, which she did not get before. The operative notes from the initial implant were included and no complications were reported. It was noted that the lead was secured to the surrounding subcutaneous tissues with 4-0 sutures.

https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfmaude/detail.cfm?mdrfoi__id=5453369
Logged
dennis100
Moderators
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +24/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 61989


« Reply #54 on: May 09, 2019, 07:33:12 AM »

Model Number 302-20
Event Date 02/01/2013
Event Type  Malfunction   
Event Description
It was initially reported that the patient was referred for surgery due to the device slipping. Diagnostics are fine but the patient feels pain. Clinic notes dated (b)(6) 2013 were received due to the patient being referred for surgery. The generator was disabled due to currently experiencing "pain in her neck over the scm muscle as it did once prior in 2006 when revision was needed, because the device had slipped out of place". The events in 2006 were previously reported in mfg report number: 1644487-2013-00840. It was noted by the surgeon that the lowest lead connection was off of the nerve, which was putting traction on the nerve. Releasing the tension moved the nerve back to a more normal position. The surgeon described the patient's tissue as "weakened", and that the tissues might be consistent with an underlying collagen vascular disorder. The patient's "tissue", specifically the fascia and collagenous tissues were described as weakened and lacking the usual texture that these tissues should demonstrate and it is suspected the patient has an underlying collagen vascular disorder. It is unclear if the possible collagen disorder caused the lead to migrate. No trauma occurred. It was further indicated in the notes that the patient had noted pain with vns stimulation on times for the past month described as focal pain at the electrode site. The patient's seizures are under good control, but the vns device was turned off due to "lead impedance problems and elevated dc code and pain". However, diagnostics were within normal limits. System diagnostics showed dcdc=2, and normal mode diagnostics showed dcdc=3. Additionally, the lead impedance was indicated as "ok". The physician also stated the generator is not at eos, "but we believe it is disconnected. " x-rays were ordered, and the patient was referred for vns replacement surgery due to painful stimulation which the physician indicated the pain could preclude injury. Upon follow-up with the treating physician, it was reported that they are unable to establish communication with the device currently but then it was later indicated that the device could be interrogated to show the impedance. Current x-rays do not show any obvious discontinuities, but they have not been provided to the manufacturer for review to date. The x-ray report indicates the x-rays were compared to those dated (b)(6) 2006 and there were no evidence of lead disruption or significant displacement identified. Additionally, there was no gross discontinuity involving the stimulator although evaluation was reported to be quite limited. No patient or manipulation is believed to have contributed to the events. The physician does not believe the leads are disconnected and does not believe that there is lead migration at this time. There were no causal or contributory programming or medication changes that preceded the onset of the events. After the device was turned off due to pain in the generator and lead area, the pain stopped. Although surgery is likely, it has not occurred to date.
 
Event Description
An analysis was performed on the returned lead portions which identified observed abraded openings on the outer and inner tubing sections have the potential for contributing to the painful stimulation allegation. The abraded opening found on the outer and one inner silicone tubing, most likely provided the leakage path for what appeared to be remnants of dried body fluids found inside the outer and one of the inner silicone tubes. For the observed inner tubing fluid remnants found inside the second inner silicone tubing, there was no obvious path for fluid ingress other than the cut ends that were made during the explanted process. The condition of the returned lead portions is consistent with conditions that typically exist following an explant procedure. Other than the abraded openings of the outer and inner tubing, no additional obvious anomalies were noted. The setscrew marks found on the lead connector pins provide evidence that, at one point in time, a good mechanical and electrical connection was present. One set of setscrew marks was found near the end of the connector pin, indicating the connector pin had not been fully inserted into the cavity of the pulse generator at one time. However, based on the location of the setscrew marks on the pin, it is unknown whether a good electrical connection was present for the connector ring. Continuity checks of the returned lead portion were performed, during the visual analysis, with no discontinuities identified. Based on the findings in the product analysis lab, there is evidence of an abraded opening in the inner tubing, which may have contributed to the stated painful stimulation complaints. The generator performed according to functional specifications. During the product analysis, there were no anomalies found with the pulse generator.
 
Manufacturer Narrative
Suspect medical device, corrected data: with the product analysis results, the initial report inadvertently reported the suspect device incorrectly. Device manufacture date, corrected data: with the product analysis results, the initial report inadvertently reported the suspect device incorrectly. Device failure occurred, and may have contributed to the patient's pain. Review of lead manufacturing records confirmed that all quality tests were passed prior to distribution.
 
Event Description
The patient had generator and lead replacement surgery on (b)(6) 2013 due to painful stimulation and the patient felt as if the device was flipping. The explanted products were received by the manufacturer on (b)(4) 2013. However, product analysis has not been completed to date.

https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfmaude/detail.cfm?mdrfoi__id=3027440
Logged
dennis100
Moderators
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +24/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 61989


« Reply #55 on: May 11, 2019, 02:53:31 AM »

Model Number 300-30
Device Problem Low impedance
Event Date 12/13/2016
Event Type  Malfunction   
Manufacturer Narrative
(b)(4).
 
Event Description
Information was received indicating that the patient was not feeling stimulation like she did before. She was now feeling pain in her ear and jaw when stimulation was delivered along with an increase in gagging and choking sensations. The patient also reported that she was experiencing a shocking sensation when she turned her head to the right occasionally which resulted itching at the electrode site. The patient also reported that the muscles in her neck would tense up for 30 seconds and then relax. The patient's generator was disabled and the tension resolved. Diagnostics showed that the impedance on the patient's generator was at dcdc 0, which could be indicative of a short circuit issue under certain circumstances. The patient then had her device prophylactically replaced in (b)(6) 2017. No additional relevant information has been received to date. The explanted generator and lead have not been received to date.
 
Manufacturer Narrative
Device information, corrected data: the initial report inadvertently reported the incorrect device information. Implant date, corrected data: the initial report inadvertently reported the incorrect implant date. Device manufacture date, corrected data: the initial report inadvertently reported the incorrect manufacture date.
 
Event Description
The generator and lead were received. Analysis on the generator was approved. The device performed according to functional specifications. Analysis of the generator concluded that no abnormal performance or any other type of adverse condition was found. Analysis on the lead has not been approved to date.
 
Event Description
Analysis on the lead was approved. Note that the lead assembly (body) including the electrodes was not returned for analysis; therefore a complete evaluation could not be performed on the entire lead product. The condition of the returned lead portions was consistent with conditions that typically exist following an explant procedure. No obvious anomalies were noted. The set screw marks found on the lead connector pins provided evidence that, at one point in time, a good mechanical and electrical connection was present. Continuity checks of the returned lead portions were performed with no discontinuities identified.
 
Manufacturer Narrative
Follow-up report #2 inadvertently listed the incorrect results and conclusion codes.

https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfmaude/detail.cfm?mdrfoi__id=6404233
Logged
dennis100
Moderators
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +24/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 61989


« Reply #56 on: May 14, 2019, 01:06:53 AM »

Model Number 302
Event Date 01/26/2014
Event Type  Malfunction   
Event Description
The patient's explanted product was received on 08/12/2016. It is unclear why the device was explanted or the date the explant occurred. Product analysis was completed on the lead. The analysis concluded that there was a stress induced fracture in one of the strand that occurred while the product was implanted. The strand on the negative coil were also found to have stress induced fractions thought to be from tension. Evidence that body fluid had once been in the inner and outer tubing was found at the torn openings. Pitting and erosion also occurred at the ends of the lead.

https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfmaude/detail.cfm?mdrfoi__id=5971640
Logged
dennis100
Moderators
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +24/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 61989


« Reply #57 on: May 14, 2019, 01:07:42 AM »

Model Number 103
Event Date 10/01/2010
Event Type  Injury   
Event Description
It was reported by a patient through a company representative that the patient's generator suture in the chest pocket had broken loose. The event happened when the patient was laying down on the ground and had a dog jump on her chest. The patient's treating neurologist performed diagnostics on the patient's device and were within normal limits (no specifics). Moreover with movement, the patient has vocal cord paralysis and possibly due to the strain of the lead pulling on the nerve. Per the patient, she has to manually hold the generator in the pocket by herself. Also, if the patient looks upward she coughs because of the weight of the device pulling on the nerve. Patient is scheduled to see the surgeon for evaluation. Additional information was received from a company representative indicating the patient underwent revision surgery. Upon surgery, the lead was twisted and pulled tension on neck; the strain relief was broken as well. The surgeon placed new pocket in chest above old pocket and sutured to fascia. He then recreated strain loop in neck. Currently, the patient called and said she is no longer feeling need to vomit or cough with neck movement. No new lead or generator was needed. Stimulation was not turned on. Patient still has vocal cord paralysis from this event so her treating physician will determine when vns will be programmed on. Mfr. Report #1644487-2010-02742 was submitted to report on the event of vocal cord paralysis. Moreover, good faith attempts to obtain additional information from the treating neurologist have been unsuccessful to date.

https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfmaude/detail.cfm?mdrfoi__id=1919363
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [All]   Go Up
Print
Jump to: