As reported from our affiliates in colombia, this was a case of a 29mm sapien 3 transcatheter heart valve.During the procedure, as the esheath, delivery system and valve were advanced, there was resistance while advancing through the esheath; however, the delivery system and valve were able to be advanced.During pre-decontamination observation of the sheath, it was observed that the liner was torn and there was a liner strand.
|
H10: updated h6- type of investigation, investigation findings corrected h6- investigation conclusions the esheath was visually inspected upon return and the following was observed: liner fully expanded and torn along the entire length.Tip opened as designed.Two strands were observed, one at approximately 13 cm from the tip and another one near the strain relief.The complaints for difficulty advancing through sheath, liner torn, and liner strand were confirmed.However, no manufacturing non-conformances were identified during engineering evaluation.A review of the dhr, lot history and complaint history did not provide any indication that a manufacturing non-conformance would have contributed to the complaint.A review of the ifu and training manuals revealed no deficiencies.Furthermore, no abnormalities were observed during device unpacking or preparation.A review of edwards lifesciences risk management documentation was performed for this case.The reported event is an anticipated risk of the transcatheter heart valve procedure, additional assessment of the failure mode is not required at this time.Per the complaint description, "during procedure, at the time of advancing the commander system by the esheath, this generates greater resistance, so it was decided to make movements forward and backward, on several times.Then, it was achieved to advance the system of the first non-expandable portion".Per the ifu/training manual, "push force can vary due to angle of insertion, vessel diameter, tortuosity and degree of calcification".Patient vessel characterization was not provided however, if any of the mentioned patient/procedural factors were present they could have created a challenging pathway for advancement of the delivery system.Per evaluation of the returned device, the liner was torn and there was presence of liner strands.It is possible that a valve strut caught onto the liner during advancement.In addition, excessive device manipulation may have been applied to overcome the experienced resistance further tearing the liner and leading to the liner strands.As such, a definite root cause was able to be determined however, it is possible that procedural factors (valve caught on liner, excessive manipulation) may have contributed to the complaint events.Complaint histories for all reported events are reviewed against trending control limits monthly, and any excursions above the control limits are assessed and documented as part of this monthly review.No corrective or preventative actions are required.
|