MAUDE Adverse Event Report: EDWARDS LIFESCIENCES EDWARDS INSPIRIS RESILIA AORTIC VALVE; TISSUE, HEART-VALVE

Model Number 11500A

Device Problem Fluid/Blood Leak (1250)

Patient Problem Insufficient Information (4580)

Event Date 12/07/2021

Event Type  Injury  

Event Description

It was reported that a patient with a 25mm aortic valve underwent a valve-in-valve procedure after an approximate implant duration of 2 years due to insufficiency.The tavr was performed with a non-edwards valve.

Manufacturer Narrative

Additional narratives: regurgitation, which develops progressively over time, can be due to a number of issues.Additionally, there can be a number of potential known and unknown patient related contributing factors.Structural valve deterioration (svd), a common reason for bioprosthesis explant or reoperation, encompasses multiple failure modes, including calcific and non-calcific degeneration, dehiscence, cusp thickening or fibrosis, or a combination of these.Such failure modes, occurring singularly or concomitantly, may contribute to stenosis and/or regurgitation.Alternatively, nonstructural dysfunction (nsvd) may also play a role in the development of valvular regurgitation.Regurgitation is most commonly related to patient factors, and is not usually an indication of a device malfunction.The device was not returned for evaluation, as it remains implanted.The investigation is still in progress; therefore, a conclusion has yet to be established.A supplemental report will be submitted accordingly upon investigation completion.

Event Description

It was reported that a patient with a 25mm aortic valve underwent a valve-in-valve procedure after an approximate implant duration of 2 years due to insufficiency.The tavr was performed with a non-edwards valve.

Manufacturer Narrative

Additional narratives: regurgitation, which develops progressively over time, can be due to a number of issues.Additionally, there can be a number of potential known and unknown patient related contributing factors.Structural valve deterioration (svd), a common reason for bioprosthesis explant or reoperation, encompasses multiple failure modes, including calcific and non-calcific degeneration, dehiscence, cusp thickening or fibrosis, or a combination of these.Such failure modes, occurring singularly or concomitantly, may contribute to stenosis and/or regurgitation.Alternatively, nonstructural dysfunction (nsvd) may also play a role in the development of valvular regurgitation.Regurgitation is most commonly related to patient factors, and is not usually an indication of a device malfunction.The device was not returned for evaluation, as it remains implanted.The investigation is still in progress; therefore, a conclusion has yet to be established.A supplemental report will be submitted accordingly upon investigation completion.

Manufacturer Narrative

Regurgitation which develops progressively over time can be due to a number of issues including patient related factors or structural valve deterioration.Structural valve deterioration (svd) can, and typically does, lead to chronic central leaks over a period of time.Svd is the most common reason for bioprosthesis explant and encompasses multiple failure modes, including calcification, non-calcific degeneration, dehiscence, cusp thickening or fibrosis, or a combination of these.Such failure modes may occur singularly or concomitantly.Tissue degeneration-related structural deterioration, either calcific or non-calcific, are common chronic failure modes for this type of bioprosthetic heart valve.Operational mechanical stress and biological factors are generally believed to be the major contributors to the non-calcific bioprosthetic tissue degeneration.In this case, minimal information regarding this procedure was received and attempts to obtain additional information regarding the condition of the device, patients medical history, or possible comorbidities have been made.No additional information was received.The device history record (dhr) review was completed and this device passed all manufacturing and sterilization inspections prior to release for distribution.There were no issues identified that would have impacted this event.Based on the available information, a definitive root cause could not be determined.Edwards will continue to review and monitor all reported events.Trends are monitored on a monthly basis and if action is required, appropriate investigation will be performed.

• Brand Name: EDWARDS INSPIRIS RESILIA AORTIC VALVE
• Type of Device: TISSUE, HEART-VALVE
• Manufacturer (Section D): EDWARDS LIFESCIENCES; one edwards way; irvine CA 92614
• Manufacturer (Section G): EDWARDS LIFESCIENCES; one edwards way; irvine CA 92614
• Manufacturer Contact: reginald santos ; one edwards way; mailstop anton 6.1; irvine, CA 92614 ; 9492502731
• MDR Report Key: 13120359
• MDR Text Key: 285677074
• Report Number: 2015691-2021-07121
• Device Sequence Number: 1
• Product Code: LWR
• UDI-Device Identifier: 00690103194999
• UDI-Public: (01)00690103194999(17)250128(11)210129217438858
• Combination Product (y/n): N
• Reporter Country Code: US
• PMA/PMN Number: P150048
• Number of Events Reported: 1
• Summary Report (Y/N): N
• Report Source: Manufacturer
• Source Type: Health Professional,Company Representative
• Reporter Occupation: Physician
• Type of Report: Initial,Followup
• Report Date: 02/07/2022

1 Device was Involved in the Event

1 Patient was Involved in the Event

• Date FDA Received: 12/30/2021
• Is this an Adverse Event Report?: Yes
• Is this a Product Problem Report?: No
• Device Operator: Health Professional
• Device Model Number: 11500A
• Device Catalogue Number: 11500A25
• Was Device Available for Evaluation?: No
• Is the Reporter a Health Professional?: Yes
• Was the Report Sent to FDA?: No
• Date Manufacturer Received: 02/04/2022
• Was Device Evaluated by Manufacturer?: Device Not Returned to Manufacturer
• Date Device Manufactured: 01/29/2021
• Is the Device Single Use?: Yes
• Is This a Reprocessed and Reused Single-Use Device?: No
• Type of Device Usage: Initial
• Patient Sequence Number: 1
• Patient Outcome(s): Hospitalization; Life Threatening; Required Intervention
• Patient Age: 66 YR
• Patient Sex: Male