The udi is unknown because the part number and lot number were not provided.The device was not returned for analysis and a review of the lot history record could not be performed as the part and lot information regarding the complaint device was not provided.Based on the available information, a cause for the reported single leaflet device attachment/slda could not be determined.A cause for the reported patient effect of recurrent tricuspid regurgitation (tr) could not be determined.The reported patient effect of recurrent tr is listed in the mitraclip system instructions for use (ifu), and is a known possible complication associated with mitraclip procedures.The reported additional therapy/non-surgical treatment was a result of case-specific circumstances.It should also be noted that the mitraclip ifu states: ¿do not use mitraclip outside of the labeled indication¿.Since mitraclip was used for a tricuspid valve procedure, this is considered as an off-label use of the device.However, it could not be determined if using the mitraclip on the tricuspid valve caused or contributed to the reported events.There is no indication of a product quality issue with respect to manufacture, design or labeling.Article titled, "comparison of transcatheter tricuspid valve repair using the mitraclip ntr and xtr systems.".
|
This is filed to report recurrent tricuspid regurgitation, single leaflet device attachment/ slda), medical intervention.It was reported in an article review that this was a mitraclip procedure to treat tricuspid regurgitation (tr).An xtr clip delivery system (cds) was advanced to the tricuspid valve for off label use, and the clip was deployed.However, the clip became detached from one leaflet, but remained attached to the other leaflet (single leaflet device attachment/ slda).A 30-day follow up revealed that the patient had recurrent tr which was treated through medical management.No additional information was provided.
|