The manufacturer was informed that on (b)(6) 2023, a perceval valve size 25 was implanted in a patient through full sternotomy and isolated procedure.Reportedly, it was found that the patient had a quadrilobation deformity of the aortic valve with severe regurgitation, and severe perivalvular leakage occurred post-procedure.As such, the device was explanted and replaced with a non-corcym biological valve.Based on the further information received, no mispositioning or mis-sizing were identified, and annulus was measured as 25.
|
Updated fields: b4, g3, g6, h2, h3, h6.The manufacturing and material records for the perceval heart valve and stent, model #icv1210, s/n # (b)(6), as they pertain to the reported event, were retrieved and reviewed by the manufacturer¿s quality engineering.The results confirmed that this valve has been manufactured and controlled in accordance with the specifications for a (model # icv1210) perceval heart valve at the time of manufacture and release.The device has been returned to the manufacturer.After decontamination, the valve was visually inspected without observing any macroscopic anomalies and/or pre-existing defects according to the specifications.The replication of collapsing phases was performed using the returned valve pvs 25/l and a demo accessory kit, in order to attempt to reproduce the reported event.No problems were encountered in the collapsing phase, and the replication has been completed without problem.No problems were encountered during the deployment in silicon aortic roots #25, and the ballooning phase, and the sealing at the annulus level is guaranteed as visible in attached pictures; thus, the valve remained fixed within the annulus.Then, inserting some water in the aortic roots from the outflow side, no paravalvular leaks were observed during the simulation.Considering the static conditions of the test, the water level remained stable under the leaflets free edge.Based on the performed analyses, it is possible to exclude the relationship between the reported issue and the returned device quality.Furthermore, form the document review performed, no manufacturing deficiencies were noted.From the information provided, patient had a ¿quadrilobation deformity¿.As such, it is possible that patient anatomy and condition has contributed to the claimed behavior of the prosthesis.
|