Citation: harky a et al.Stented versus stentless aortic valve replacement in patients with small aortic root: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Innovations (phila).2018 nov/dec;13(6):404-416.Doi: 10.1097/imi.0000000000000569.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.(b)(4).If information is provided in the future, a supplemental report will be issued.
|
Medtronic received information via literature regarding a comparison of the outcomes of stented versus stentless aortic valve replacement in patients with a small aortic root.All data were collected from a meta-analysis review of 7 studies published between 1999 and 2016.The study population included 965 patients and was predominantly female with a mean age of 74 years.An unspecified proportion of these patients were implanted with medtronic freestyle or mosaic bioprosthetic valves.No serial numbers were provided.Among all patients, 48 in-hospital and 57 one-year post-operative deaths were observed, respectively.Multiple manufacturers bioprosthetic valves were involved in the study and no further details about the deaths were provided.Based on the available information, medtronic product was not directly associated with the deaths.Among all patients, post-operative adverse events included: reoperation for bleeding, stroke, need for permanent pacemaker implantation, unspecified cardiac complications, atrial fibrillation, sternal wound infection, and patient-prosthesis mismatch.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.
|