Edwards received notification of a pascal in tricuspid position where during the patient's follow up tte at 30 days post procedure, it was noted that the posterior-septal device was not in its original position, it could not be located on tte.Patient is doing well and there are no plans for reintervention.
|
Upon completion of the image evaluation, there appeared to be a device embolization of the second ace device in 1-month follow-up tte (02/08/2023).There was an slda of the second ace device observed on the discharge tte (01/06/2023).The posterior tricuspid leaflet was no longer visualized attached to the second ace device and the ace device was mobile throughout the cardiac cycle.In the 1-month follow-up imaging the second ace device was no longer visualized in the right heart.Final residual tr appeared semi-quantitatively, 4 - massive.Could not confirm any evidence of device related issues or concerns.
|
The pascal training manual instructs the operator on position and deployment of the device, including all procedural and anatomical considerations.Physicians are extensively trained by edwards before they are qualified to use the pascal system.Training includes patient screening (to ensure leaflet anatomy is suitable for the device), device preparation, procedural approach, device deployment, and imaging, through use of procedure specific training manuals and proctored procedures.Based on the imaging evaluation, an slda of the second ace device is observed on the discharge tte with the posterior tricuspid leaflet no longer visualized attached to the ace device and the device appearing mobile throughout the cardiac cycle.In subsequent review of the 1-month follow-up tte images provided, there appears to be a device embolization of the second ace device consistent with the reported event.The imaging evaluation identified procedural related issues (inadequate leaflet grasping, misinterpretation, and missing necessary maneuvers), and imaging related issues (no leaflet grasping clip recorded, and device or catheter shadow) as potential contributing factors to the device embolization, however a definite root cause is unable to be determined.Furthermore, the device history record review was completed, and this device passed all manufacturing and sterilization inspections.There were no non-conformances identified related to the complaint event.
|