This (b)(6) male patient's anatomy at birth consisted of dextrocardia (situs inversus totalis) with double outlet right ventricle and an interrupted aortic arch (type b).The first stage of palliation included a 6-mm gore-tex interposition graft, as well as banding of the main pulmonary artery.Several months later, he underwent repair of the ventricular septal defect.The following year, the interposition graft was upsized to a 12-mm hemashield tube graft.The patient did quite well over a 17-year period, requiring catheter-based intervention to stent the proximal (9 years after implant) and distal ends of the graft (11 years after implant), as well as further procedures to dilate previously placed stents (up to 14 mm).Seventeen years after the initial implant, in the setting of upper extremity hypertension, worsening exercise intolerance, and intermittent chest pain, the patient was taken to the operating room for up-sizing of the hemashield graft.The procedure was ultimately aborted secondary to significant bleeding.The graft was densely adherent to the chest wall and began to disintegrate during the dissection.The patient recovered from the unsuccessful attempt at replacing the graft.He was taken to the cath lab several months later, where an 18mm× 105 cm zenith alpha endograft (cook medical, bloomington, in) was placed across the tube graft.The endograft was reinforced with three max ld 36-mm stents (medtronic, minneapolis, mn), which were dilated to 18 mm.He has been asymptomatic in the 12 months since the procedure.Follow-up imaging has not identified any residual defects with the stented dacron graft.This complaint case was opened following the publication of the article: aurigemma d, borquez a, lee j, et al.Non-anastomotic failure of woven dacron tube grafts in the thoracic aorta in young adults.J card surg.2018; 33: 653-657.Four cases are described in the article, including this case of which the manufacturer was not aware before the article publication.This event is described as "case 3" in the article and took place somewhere between march 2014 and march 2017.The 3 other cases described in the article are reported in the following medical device reports: case 1 = 1640201-2017-00025, case 2 = 1640201-2017-00026, case 4 = 1640201-2017-00024.
|
Despite repeated attempts, product identification was never provided by the hospital.Therefore, no manufacturing investigations, including the review of the device history records, could be conducted.(4112/213/180) the article was analyzed by the chief of pediatric cardiac surgery at university of iowa, who has been a user of hemashield vascular grafts since the beginning of his now 20+ years practice.He has never encountered anything even similar to the events described in the article.He also stated that because these events have been described in one center only versus few single isolated occurrences described in the literature, a root cause should be considered from the way the grafts were handled during the initial operation and on any subsequent endovascular intervention performed on these patients.(4109/213) besides these four cases in san diego, no associated or similar cases with hemashield grafts have been found in any other complaint cases to date.(4315) the cause of the events remains undetermined.Graft handling during the initial procedure and subsequent endovascular procedures performed on these patients should not be excluded as potential causes of the event.
|