• Decrease font size
  • Return font size to normal
  • Increase font size
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services

MAUDE Adverse Event Report: AGA MEDICAL CORPORATION AMPLATZER SEPTAL OCCLUDER; CARDIAC OCCLUSION DEVICE

  • 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
 

AGA MEDICAL CORPORATION AMPLATZER SEPTAL OCCLUDER; CARDIAC OCCLUSION DEVICE Back to Search Results
Device Problem Adverse Event Without Identified Device or Use Problem (2993)
Patient Problem Atrial Fibrillation (1729)
Event Type  Injury  
Manufacturer Narrative
An event of atrial septal defect was reported.The results of the investigation are inconclusive since the device was not returned for analysis.Based on the information received, the cause of the reported incident could not be conclusively determined.
 
Event Description
The following information was obtained from a literature articled titled, minimally invasive endoscopic surgery versus catheter-based device occlusion for atrial septal defects in adults: reconsideration of the standard of care, from the journal of interact cardiovasc thorac surg.(2017 apr 1;24(4):603-608).Objectives: percutaneous ostium secundum atrial septal defect (asd ii) closure has become the standard of care for treatment of congenital asd ii in adults.Nevertheless, patients are frequently ineligible for this technique due to challenging morphology.In such cases, closure via minimally invasive cardiac surgery (mics) is an appropriate treatment option.The aim of this study is to compare outcomes of mics and use of a percutaneous amplatzer septal occluder (aso) device for treatment of asd ii in adults.Methods: from july 2002 to june 2014, 95 patients underwent mics for congenital asd ii closure.During the same period, 169 patients underwent aso procedure.Outcomes in terms of remaining asd ii, new onset atrial fibrillation (af), post-interventional stroke, myocardial infarction and the post procedural implementation of anticoagulation were compared.Results: apart from age (38.3 ± 12.7 vs 49.6 ± 15.7 years, p < 0.0001) the groups did not differ in baseline characteristics.A significantly higher rate of residual asd ii was found in the aso group at 3 months (0% vs 30.8%, p < 0.0001), 6 months (0% vs 15.9%, p < 0.0001) and 12 months follow-up (0% vs 7.1%, p = 0.005).A significantly higher rate of new-onset af was seen in the aso group (0% vs 9.5%, p = 0.0008).Conclusions: mics for asd ii is a safe and reproducible procedure with 0% mortality in our cohort.More complete closure of asd, decreased rates of new onset af and decreased need for oral anticoagulation are the advantages of the mics procedure.Compared with the current standard of care, the mics approach is feasible regardless of asd morphology.Patient identifier, age, weight and gender is protected under local privacy laws, and therefore is not recorded.
 
Search Alerts/Recalls

  New Search  |  Submit an Adverse Event Report

Brand Name
AMPLATZER SEPTAL OCCLUDER
Type of Device
CARDIAC OCCLUSION DEVICE
Manufacturer (Section D)
AGA MEDICAL CORPORATION
5050 nathan lane north
plymouth MN 55442
Manufacturer (Section G)
AGA MEDICAL CORPORATION
5050 nathan lane north
plymouth MN 55442
Manufacturer Contact
denise johnson
5050 nathan lane north
plymouth, MN 55442
6517564470
MDR Report Key7145293
MDR Text Key95726661
Report Number2135147-2017-00188
Device Sequence Number1
Product Code MLV
Combination Product (y/n)N
Reporter Country CodeGM
Number of Events Reported1
Summary Report (Y/N)N
Report Source Manufacturer
Source Type company representative,foreig
Reporter Occupation Physician
Type of Report Initial
Report Date 12/24/2017
1 Device was Involved in the Event
1 Patient was Involved in the Event
Date FDA Received12/24/2017
Is this an Adverse Event Report? Yes
Is this a Product Problem Report? No
Device Operator Health Professional
Was Device Available for Evaluation? No
Is the Reporter a Health Professional? Yes
Date Manufacturer Received11/27/2017
Was Device Evaluated by Manufacturer? Device Not Returned to Manufacturer
Type of Device Usage Initial
Patient Sequence Number1
Patient Outcome(s) Hospitalization; Required Intervention;
-
-