Correction to h6; type of investigation, investigation findings, investigation conclusion.The certitude delivery system was not returned for evaluation.Due to the unavailability of the complaint device, engineering was unable to perform any visual inspection, functional testing, or dimensional analysis.Imagery was provided that showed a balloon burst radially and longitudinally.A device history record (dhr) review was performed and did not reveal any manufacturing nonconformance issues that would have contributed to the event.The reported event of balloon burst was confirmed based on evaluation of the provided imagery.Due to unavailability of device, engineering was unable to perform any visual, functional or dimensional analysis.Therefore, the presence of a manufacturing non-conformance was unable to be determined.However, review of the dhr did not provide any indication that a manufacturing non-conformance would have contributed to the complaint event.An existing technical summary has been documented for root cause analysis on balloon bursts in a calcified landing zone.The technical summary provides a rationale as to why it is unlikely that a product defect or manufacturing non-conformance contributed to this type of event, including factors on why deployment of balloons on thv delivery systems are subject to increased risk of burst in a calcified landing zone.The complaint description states, "the certitude delivery system balloon ruptured at the end of valve deployment" additional information revealed the patient had stj calcium.The presence of calcification can create a challenging anatomy for balloon inflation.While the balloons are sufficiently designed and tested to ensure the burst pressure is at or above the rated burst pressure, calcified nodules can compromise the structure of the balloon wall via following mechanisms such as puncture, local overstretching, open cell impingement, or stress concentration.In addition, the technical summary outlines the extensive manufacturing mitigations in place to prevent this type of malfunction (visual and dimensional inspections, leak testing, and functional balloon burst testing that occurs with every manufactured lot).These inspections and testing further support that it is unlikely that a defect present in manufacturing contributed to the complaint.The technical summary also outlines the instructions for valve deployment.It should be noted that these mitigations are still in place.In this case, a review of available information suggests that patient factors (calcification) contributed to the balloon burst.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.As such, neither a product risk assessment, nor corrective or preventative actions are required at this time.
|