• Decrease font size
  • Return font size to normal
  • Increase font size
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services

MAUDE Adverse Event Report: MEDTRONIC HEART VALVES DIVISION COREVALVE 29MM AORTIC VALVE; AORTIC VALVE, PROSTHESIS, PERCUTANEOUSLY DELIVERED

  • Print
  • Share
  • E-mail
-
Super Search Devices@FDA
510(k) | DeNovo | Registration & Listing | Adverse Events | Recalls | PMA | HDE | Classification | Standards
CFR Title 21 | Radiation-Emitting Products | X-Ray Assembler | Medsun Reports | CLIA | TPLC
 

MEDTRONIC HEART VALVES DIVISION COREVALVE 29MM AORTIC VALVE; AORTIC VALVE, PROSTHESIS, PERCUTANEOUSLY DELIVERED Back to Search Results
Model Number MCS-P3-29-AOA
Device Problems Device Operates Differently Than Expected (2913); Insufficient Information (3190)
Patient Problems Aortic Regurgitation (1716); No Known Impact Or Consequence To Patient (2692)
Event Date 04/23/2014
Event Type  Injury  
Event Description
Medtronic received information that following the implant of this transcatheter bioprosthetic valve, severe central regurgitation was noted.A second corevalve was implanted valve in valve which resolved the regurgitation.No adverse patient effects were reported.Transesophageal echocardiogram (tee) during the procedure showed the central leakage, in the shape of one leaflet.Procedural films have been requested but not received.
 
Manufacturer Narrative
Product analysis: the product remains implanted, therefore no product analysis can be performed.Conclusion: based on the information provided, the reported aortic regurgitation that required reintervention could possibly be related to patient anatomy and/or implant position.Positioning is dependent on patient anatomy as well as user technique.Potential factors that can influence implant position include tension applied on the delivery catheter system (dcs) during positioning, calcification levels in the native vessel and compliance of the aorta and native vessels.The procedure was successfully completed with no adverse patient effects reported.The root cause for this report could not be established from the information available.Should additional information be obtained, a supplemental report will be submitted.(b)(4).
 
Manufacturer Narrative
Conclusion: the device history record was reviewed and showed that this product met all manufacturing specifications for product released for distribution.No issues were identified that would have impacted this event.Per the angiographic report, post-implantation aortography revealed an implantation depth of approximately 10mm with moderately-severe to severe (grade 3+ to 4+) aortic regurgitation.Some of the regurgitation appeared to be paravalvular leakage in the area of the non-coronary cusp.Post-implantation dilatation of the first device was performed and subsequent aortography demonstrated a slight improvement in aortic regurgitation.Given the angiographic view that was provided, it was not possible to appreciate whether paravalvular leakage was present.After the post-implantation dilatation, the source of the aortic regurgitation could have been central or paravalvular.A second corevalve was implanted approximately 4 mm higher than the first corevalve.No aortography was documented following this second device implant.The procedural echocardiogram was reviewed and confirmed regurgitation after the first valve was implanted.Per the echocardiogram it appeared to be a transvalvular/central eccentric flow.Artifact made it difficult to quantify the amount of regurgitation.The severe regurgitation was confirmed after the first valve was implanted through the imaging review.The first valve was implanted deep at 10mm, and this could contribute to paravalvular and/or central leakage.The angiographic review was not able to discern the central regurgitation from the paravalvular leakage.The angiographic review did not show any anomalies to explain the regurgitation.As the device was not explanted, no analysis was performed and a conclusive cause could not be determined.The severe regurgitation was resolved with the successful implant of a second valve.The devices remain implanted.No other adverse effects were reported.Medtronic will continue to monitor for similar events.
 
Manufacturer Narrative
If information is provided in the future, a supplemental report will be issued.
 
Search Alerts/Recalls

  New Search  |  Submit an Adverse Event Report

Brand Name
COREVALVE 29MM AORTIC VALVE
Type of Device
AORTIC VALVE, PROSTHESIS, PERCUTANEOUSLY DELIVERED
Manufacturer (Section D)
MEDTRONIC HEART VALVES DIVISION
1851 e deere ave
santa ana CA 92705
Manufacturer (Section G)
MEDTRONIC STRUCTURAL HEART
8200 coral sea street ne
mounds view MN 55112
Manufacturer Contact
paula bixby
8200 coral sea street ne
mounds view, MN 55112
7635055378
MDR Report Key3821727
MDR Text Key4398137
Report Number2025587-2014-00311
Device Sequence Number1
Product Code NPT
Combination Product (y/n)N
Reporter Country CodeNL
PMA/PMN Number
P130021
Number of Events Reported1
Summary Report (Y/N)N
Report Source Manufacturer
Source Type Foreign,Health Professional,Company Representative,company representati
Reporter Occupation Physician
Type of Report Initial,Followup,Followup
Report Date 07/02/2014
1 Device was Involved in the Event
1 Patient was Involved in the Event
Is this an Adverse Event Report? No
Is this a Product Problem Report? Yes
Device Operator Health Professional
Device Expiration Date02/29/2016
Device Model NumberMCS-P3-29-AOA
Device Catalogue NumberMCS-P3-29-AOA
Was Device Available for Evaluation? No
Is the Reporter a Health Professional? Yes
Initial Date Manufacturer Received 07/02/2014
Initial Date FDA Received05/20/2014
Supplement Dates Manufacturer ReceivedNot provided
07/02/2014
Supplement Dates FDA Received07/09/2014
09/14/2017
Was Device Evaluated by Manufacturer? No
Date Device Manufactured03/11/2014
Is the Device Single Use? Yes
Is This a Reprocessed and Reused Single-Use Device? No
Type of Device Usage Initial
Patient Sequence Number1
Patient Outcome(s) Required Intervention;
-
-