• 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 9750CM23A
Device Problem Burst Container or Vessel (1074)
Patient Problem No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions (4582)
Event Date 02/08/2024
Event Type  malfunction  
Manufacturer Narrative
This is one of two manufacturer reports being submitted for this case.Please reference related manufacturer report no: 2015691-2024-01354.Complaint reference number: 2024-03339-02.The investigation is ongoing.The device was not returned.
 
Event Description
As reported by a field clinical specialist (fcs), approximately 8 years and 10 months post-implant of a 26 mm sapien xt valve in the aortic position via transfemoral approach, the valve failed due to stenosis.A valve in valve (viv) procedure was performed.During viv procedure, the delivery system's balloon ruptured during deployment and the new tavr valve was post dilated with a 22 mm non-ew balloon.
 
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 investigation conclusions and investigation findings.Added new information to h.6 type of investigation.The device was not returned to edwards lifesciences for evaluation.Without the device returned for evaluation, visual inspection, functional testing and dimensional analysis were unable to be completed.Imagery was provided from the site and revealed the following: calcification was present within the patient's aortic root and the leaflets of the previously implanted valve.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 complaint was unable to be confirmed as no device or relevant imagery showing the balloon burst during deployment was provided.Due to the unavailability of the device, engineering was unable to perform any visual, functional, or dimensional analysis; therefore, a manufacturing non-conformance was unable to be determined.Additionally, a review of the dhr and lot history did not provide any indication that a manufacturing non-conformance would have contributed to the complaint.A review of the ifu and training manuals revealed no deficiencies.As reported, ''during viv procedure, the delivery system's balloon ruptured during deployment.'' the balloon burst could be potentially from multiple factors (i.E.Calcified annulus/leaflets, additional inflation volume, and previous implanted valve).Available information suggests calcification likely contribute to the event as the provided 3mensio showed calcification at the implant location.The presence of calcification can create a challenging anatomy for balloon inflation.While the balloons are sufficiently designed and tested to ensure the burst pressure is at or above the rated burst pressure, calcified nodules can compromise the structure of the balloon wall via following mechanisms such as puncture, local overstretching, open cell impingement, or stress concentration.Additionally, it was noted that an additional extra volume was added to the balloon.The prescribed nominal inflation volume is provided in the ifu.It is possible the balloon was over-inflated, subjecting the balloon to pressures high enough to cause the balloon to burst.While a definitive root cause was unknown, available information suggests that patient (calcification) and procedural factors (over inflation) may have contributed to the balloon burst.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 Key18785123
MDR Text Key336622463
Report Number2015691-2024-01355
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 Health Professional,User Facility,Company Representative
Reporter Occupation Physician
Type of Report Initial,Followup
Report Date 04/10/2024
1 Device was Involved in the Event
1 Patient was Involved in the Event
Date FDA Received02/26/2024
Is this an Adverse Event Report? No
Is this a Product Problem Report? Yes
Device Operator Health Professional
Device Model Number9750CM23A
Was Device Available for Evaluation? No
Is the Reporter a Health Professional? Yes
Was the Report Sent to FDA? No
Date Manufacturer Received04/05/2024
Was Device Evaluated by Manufacturer? Device Not Returned to Manufacturer
Date Device Manufactured09/13/2023
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 SexFemale
-
-