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.
|
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.
|