Citation: akodad m et al.Hemodynamic performances and clinical outcomes in patients undergoing valve-in-valve versus native transcatheter aortic valve implantation.Am j cardiol.2019 jul 1;124(1):90-97.Doi: 10.1016/j.Amjcard.2019.04.009 (including supplementary material).Epub 2019 apr 18.Earliest date of publish used for event date.No unique device identifier (serial/lot) numbers were provided; without this information it could not be determined whether these observations have been previously reported.Without the return of the product, no definitive conclusion can be made regarding the clinical observations.If information is provided in the future, a supplemental report will be issued.
|
Medtronic received information via literature regarding a comparison of the hemodynamic performances and clinical outcomes in patients who underwent aortic valve-in-valve procedure versus transcatheter aortic valve implantation in patients with native aortic stenosis.All data were retrospectively collected from two centers between 2013 and 2017.The study population included 132 patients (predominantly female; mean age 83 years), 2 patients were previously implanted with medtronic mosaic surgical aortic valves and one was previously implanted with a medtronic 3f enable surgical aortic valve (no serial numbers provided).Among the mosaic and 3f enable patients, adverse events included: transcatheter aortic valve-in-valve implantation due to stenosis, regurgitation, combination of both, or patient-prosthesis mismatch.Onset of structural valve deterioration was noted to have occurred at a mean 9 years after surgical valve implant.Based on the available information, medtronic product may have been associated with the adverse events.No additional adverse patient effects or product performance issues were reported.
|