• Decrease font size
  • Return font size to normal
  • Increase font size
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services

MAUDE Adverse Event Report: EDWARDS LIFESCIENCES COMMANDER DELIVERY SYSTEM; AORTIC VALVE, PROSTHESIS, PERCUTANEOUSLY DELIVERED

  • Print
  • Share
  • E-mail
-
Super Search Devices@FDA
510(k) | DeNovo | Registration & Listing | Adverse Events | Recalls | PMA | HDE | Classification | Standards
CFR Title 21 | Radiation-Emitting Products | X-Ray Assembler | Medsun Reports | CLIA | TPLC
 

EDWARDS LIFESCIENCES COMMANDER DELIVERY SYSTEM; AORTIC VALVE, PROSTHESIS, PERCUTANEOUSLY DELIVERED Back to Search Results
Model Number 9610TF26U
Device Problems Fluid/Blood Leak (1250); Difficult to Remove (1528); Failure to Align (2522); Material Split, Cut or Torn (4008)
Patient Problem Vascular Dissection (3160)
Event Date 09/19/2023
Event Type  Injury  
Manufacturer Narrative
The investigation is ongoing.H3 other text : the device was not returned.
 
Event Description
As reported, it was a case of an implant of a 26mm sapien 3 ultra valve, in aortic position by transaxillary approach.Although valve alignment was attempted in a straight section of the aorta, there were alignment difficulties that started during gross alignment in ascending aorta.This was due to the tension of the system.These difficulties continued during fine alignment but was resolve.The operator was managed to pull the balloon into the valve and cross native aortic valve.During balloon inflation, it was not possible to inflate the balloon and blood was observed in the inflation device.The balloon was ruptured, and the valve implant was not performed.During removal, it was difficult to withdraw the system with the valve through esheath and a surgical cutdown was performed to retrieve the device.There was no damage observed on the esheath after the withdrawal.However, a dissection in the subclavian artery occurred.A new 26mm sapien 3 ultra valve was implanted with good result and no complication.After a successful valve deployment, the surgeon was able to fix the subclavian artery.The patient was stable and sent to icu.
 
Manufacturer Narrative
A supplemental mdr is being submitted for correction and additional information.The following sections of this report have been updated: corrected h.6 device codes, investigation conclusions and investigation findings.Added new information to h.6 component code and type of investigation.The device was returned to edwards lifesciences for evaluation and the following was observed.Flex shaft bunched and compressed near flex tip.Balloon torn at i/c bond location.Inflation balloon bunched distally of crimped thv.Flex tip gouges observed.Applicable imagery was not provided for review.A review of the risk management documentation was performed, and no evidence of product non-conformances or labeling/ifu inadequacies were identified in the evaluation.The complaints were confirmed during device evaluation.However, no manufacturing non-conformance was identified during the evaluation.An existing technical summary written by edwards lifesciences has been documented for root cause analysis on tension build up in the system due to valve alignment difficulty resulting in the reported balloon torn and withdrawal difficulty.The technical summary provides a rationale as to why it is unlikely that a product defect or manufacturing non-conformance contributed to this type of event.In addition, the technical summary outlines the extensive manufacturing mitigations in place to prevent this type of malfunction (visual and dimensional inspections, leak testing, and functional testing that occurs with every manufactured lot).These inspections and testing further support that it is unlikely that a defect present in manufacturing contributed to the complaint.The technical summary also outlines the instructions for valve deployment.It should be noted that these mitigations are still in place.In this case, it was reported that the patient did not have a tortuous aorta and valve alignment was performed in a straight section of the aorta.In addition, during evaluation of the returned device gross alignment and fine adjust were able to be performed without issue.Therefore, a definite root cause for the valve alignment difficulty is unable to be determined with information available.However, review of available information suggests that procedural factors (high valve alignment forces, valve's interaction with the balloon, excessive manipulation) may have contributed to the balloon torn while procedural factors (withdrawal of torn balloon) contributed to the withdrawal difficulty.Complaint histories for all reported events are reviewed against trending control limits monthly, and any excursions above the control limits are assessed and documented as part of this monthly review.No ifu/labeling/training manual inadequacies were identified.Therefore, no corrective or preventative action nor product risk assessment is required at this time.
 
Search Alerts/Recalls

  New Search  |  Submit an Adverse Event Report

Brand Name
COMMANDER DELIVERY SYSTEM
Type of Device
AORTIC VALVE, PROSTHESIS, PERCUTANEOUSLY DELIVERED
Manufacturer (Section D)
EDWARDS LIFESCIENCES
1 edwards way
irvine CA 92614
Manufacturer (Section G)
EDWARDS LIFESCIENCES
1 edwards way
irvine CA 92614
Manufacturer Contact
renee van dorne
1 edwards way
irvine, CA 92614
9492506385
MDR Report Key17905396
MDR Text Key325303119
Report Number2015691-2023-16669
Device Sequence Number1
Product Code NPT
Combination Product (y/n)N
Reporter Country CodeUS
PMA/PMN Number
P140031
Number of Events Reported1
Summary Report (Y/N)N
Report Source Manufacturer
Source Type Foreign,Health Professional,User Facility,Company Representative
Reporter Occupation Physician
Type of Report Initial,Followup
Report Date 12/18/2023
1 Device was Involved in the Event
1 Patient was Involved in the Event
Date FDA Received10/10/2023
Is this an Adverse Event Report? Yes
Is this a Product Problem Report? Yes
Device Operator Health Professional
Device Model Number9610TF26U
Device Lot Number65097685
Was Device Available for Evaluation? Device Returned to Manufacturer
Is the Reporter a Health Professional? Yes
Was the Report Sent to FDA? No
Date Manufacturer Received12/18/2023
Was Device Evaluated by Manufacturer? Yes
Date Device Manufactured05/22/2023
Is the Device Single Use? Yes
Is This a Reprocessed and Reused Single-Use Device? No
Type of Device Usage Initial
Patient Sequence Number1
Patient Outcome(s) Required Intervention;
Patient Age77 YR
Patient SexMale
-
-