It was reported this was a mitraclip procedure to treat tricuspid regurgitation (tr) with a grade of 5, a retracted septal leaflet, and friable anterior leaflet.It was noted imaging was challenging and one clip was previously implanted.That implanted clip had detached from the septal leaflet leaflet and remained attached to the anterior leaflet (single leaflet device attachment/slda).To stabilize the slda, two clips were successfully implanted.However, after deployment of the second clip, it detached from the anterior leaflet and remained attached to the septal leaflet (slda).No additional clips were implanted and tr was reduced to a grade of 2.There was no clinically significant delay in the procedure and no adverse patient effects occurred.
|
The device was not returned for analysis.A review of the lot history record revealed no manufacturing nonconformities issued to the reported lot that would have contributed to this event.Additionally, a review of the complaint history did not indicate a lot-specific quality issue.Based on available information, the reported incomplete coaptation (single leaflet device attachment/slda), associated with the clip detachment from the anterior leaflet, was due to pre-existing patient anatomy as per the physician.The reported image resolution poor was associated with challenging image acquisition during the procedure.The reported off-label use was associated with using the mitraclip device for tricuspid valve repair.It should be noted that the mitraclip instructions for use (ifu) states, ¿the mitraclip g4 system is indicated for the percutaneous reduction of significant symptomatic mitral regurgitation due to primary abnormality of the mitral apparatus.¿ there is no indication of a product quality issue with respect to manufacture, design, or labeling.The additional mitraclip device referenced in b5 is being filed under a separate medwatch report.H6: device code 1494 - indication for use (use in tricuspid valve).
|