Citation: heemoon lee, late clinical outcomes after mechanical aortic valve replacement for aortic stenosis: old versus new prostheses j thorac dis.2018 jun; 10(6): 3361¿3371doi: 10.21037/jtd.2018.06.03 earliest date of publish used for event date.No unique device identifier (serial/lot) numbers were provided; without this information it could not be determined whether these observations have been previously reported.Without return of the product no definitive conclusion can be made regarding the clinical observations.If information is provided in the future, a supplemental report will be issued.
|
Medtronic received information via literature regarding late clinical outcomes of new-generation mechanical valves for severe aortic stenosis (as) compared with old mechanical valves.All data were collected from a single center between january 1995 and december 2013.The study population included 254 patients (predominantly male, median age 59 years), 33 patients were implanted with medtronic ats open pivot mechanical heart valve and 32 patients were implanted with med hall easy-fit mechanical heart valve.No serial numbers were provided.Among all patients, there were 28 late deaths reported in both study groups combined.The causes of death included cerebral hemorrhage in three, cerebral infarction in two, alveolar hemorrhage in one, heart failure in one, ischemic cardiomyopathy in one, sudden death in one, cancer in six, aging in one, and unknown in ten patients.Multiple manufacturers were noted in the literature; based on the available information a direct correlation could not be made between medtronic product and the observed adverse events.Among all patients, adverse events included: bleeding requiring reoperation (n=2), permanent pacemaker implantation (n=1), thromboem bolic events, prosthesis-patient mismatch (n=12), infective endocarditis (n=3), pannus formation (n=2) and trisucpid regurgitation.Based on the available information, medtronic product may have caused or contributed to these adverse events.Among all patients, 1 device malfunction was reported in the old-valve group of patients who received ats standard and 32- med hall valves.The device malfunction was not specifically attributed to a particular medtronic product.Therefore, conservatively choosing to report the malfunction on both the product groups.No additional adverse patient effects or product performance issues were reported.
|