VIEWFLEX¿ICE CATHETER
Report
- Report Number
- 2030404-2025-00062
- Event Type
- Injury
- Date Received
- November 28, 2025
- Date of Event
- September 17, 2025
- Report Date
- November 28, 2025
- Manufacturer
- ABBOTT MEDICAL
- Product Code
- DRJ
- Adverse Event
- Yes
- Report Source
- Manufacturer report
- Reporter Location
- VA, US
- Reporter Occupation
- PHYSICIAN
- Health Professional
- Yes
Narratives
AN EVENT OF PERICARDIAL EFFUSION WAS REPORTED. THE RESULTS OF THE INVESTIGATION ARE INCONCLUSIVE SINCE THE DEVICE WAS NOT RETURNED FOR ANALYSIS. REVIEW OF THE DEVICE HISTORY RECORD WAS NOT POSSIBLE AS THE LOT NUMBER IS UNKNOWN. BASED ON THE INFORMATION RECEIVED, THE CAUSE OF THE REPORTED PERICARDIAL EFFUSION COULD NOT BE CONCLUSIVELY DETERMINED. MODEL/LOT NUMBER INFORMATION WAS NOT ABLE TO BE OBTAINED FOR THIS DEVICE. THEREFORE, FULL UDI INFORMATION(D4) AND 510K(G3) ARE NOT AVAILABLE.
FOLLOWING A SUCCESSFUL ATRIAL FIBRILLATION PROCEDURE, AFTER REMOVAL OF THE CATHETERS AND SHEATHS FROM THE PATIENT'S BODY, THE PATIENT BECAME HYPOTENSIVE. AN ECHOCARDIOGRAM WAS USED TO OBSERVE THE POTENTIAL FOR PERICARDIAL EFFUSION. PERICARDIAL EFFUSION WAS CONFIRMED AND IT WAS ATTEMPTED TO PERFORM A PERICARDIOCENTESIS TO RELEASE THE FLUID BUILDUP SURROUNDING THE CARDIAC TISSUE POSTERIORLY TO THE HEART AS WELL AS ANTERIOR TO THE RIGHT VENTRICLE. ANOTHER ATTENDING PHYSICIAN WAS CALLED IN TO AID IN THE PLACEMENT OF WIRES NEEDED TO PERFORM THE FLUID RELEASE TAP. THE WIRES WERE PLACED SUCCESSFULLY AND APPROXIMATELY 2L OF BLOOD WAS WITHDRAWN FROM THE EFFUSION AND RECYCLED THROUGH THE GUIDE THAT WAS PLACED IN THE PATIENT'S GROIN. THE PATIENT STABILIZED AFTER SEVERAL ROUNDS OF THIS RECYCLING TECHNIQUE. THE PATIENT WAS MOVED TO THE ICU TO BE MONITORED AND HAS SINCE FULLY RECOVERED. THERE WERE NO ALLEGED PERFORMANCE ISSUES WITH ANY ABBOTT DEVICES. THE PHYSICIAN ALLEGES THAT A PERFORATION COULD HAVE BEEN MADE IN THE LEFT ATRIUM AT SOME POINT DURING THE PROCEDURE FOR THE PERICARDIAL EFFUSION TO BE PRESENT. AFTER FURTHER FOLLOW UP WITH THE PHYSICIAN, THE CONCLUSION WAS THAT THE PRODUCT RESPONSIBLE FOR THE PERFORATION DURING THE CASE WAS THE VIEWFLEX ICE CATHETER NOT THE TACTIFLEX SE. AT THE TIME IT WAS DIFFICULT TO DETERMINE WHICH PRODUCT WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE EVENT, BUT IN HINDSIGHT THE PERFORATION AND LATER EFFUSION WAS PRIMARILY LOCATED AROUND THE RIGHT VENTRICLE WHERE THE VIEWFLEX ICE CATHETER WAS DURING THE CASE.
Devices
| Seq | Brand | Generic | Product Code | Manufacturer | Model | Lot | UDI-DI |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2400310 | VIEWFLEX¿ICE CATHETER | SYSTEM, SIGNAL ISOLATION | DRJ | ABBOTT MEDICAL |
Patients
| Seq | Age | Sex | Outcome | Treatment |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | NA | Male | Required Intervention | TACTICATH¿ ABLATION CATHETER, SE |