The device was not returned for analysis.A review of the lot history record revealed no manufacturing nonconformities issued to the reported lot that would have contributed to this event.Additionally, a review of the complaint history identified no other complaints reported from this lot.The investigation determined the reported slda appears to be a cascading effect of the reported device damaged by another device (dislodged).The report device damaged by anther device (dislodged) was due to interaction between the clips.The reported poor image resolution was due to imaging was challenging.The tissue injury (new chordal rupture) appears to be due to the slda.Tissue injury is listed in the instructions for use as a known possible complication associated with mitraclip procedures.The reported serious injury/illness/impairment was a result of case specific circumstance as no treatment was provided for the tissue injury.There is no indication of a product issue with respect to manufacture, design or labeling.The additional mitraclip device referenced in b5 is being filed under a separate medwatch report.
|
It was reported this was a mitraclip procedure to treat degenerative mitral regurgitation (mr) with a grade of 4, bi-leaflet prolapse, and pre-existing chordal rupture.It was noted imaging was challenging throughout the procedure.Three clips were inserted and successfully implanted.To further reduce mr, a fourth ntw clip (30118r1058) was inserted.However, while grasping with the fourth clip, it interacted with the second implanted xtw clip (31003a1020).The second implanted clip dislodged and detached from the posterior leaflet and remained attached to the anterior leaflet (single leaflet device attachment/slda).It was noted a new chordal rupture was observed.The fourth clip was unable to grasp the leaflets.Therefore, the clip was removed from the anatomy, and the procedure was discontinued.Mr remained at a grade of 4.There was no clinically significant delay in the procedure.
|