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

MAUDE Adverse Event Report: EDWARDS LIFESCIENCES EDWARDS SAPIEN XT TRANSCATHETER HEART 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
 

EDWARDS LIFESCIENCES EDWARDS SAPIEN XT TRANSCATHETER HEART VALVE; AORTIC VALVE, PROSTHESIS, PERCUTANEOUSLY DELIVERED Back to Search Results
Model Number 9300TFX23J
Device Problem Device Operates Differently Than Expected (2913)
Patient Problem Heart Failure (2206)
Event Date 11/05/2014
Event Type  Injury  
Event Description
As reported by our japan affiliate, a sapien xt was placed within an existing sapien valve 2 years post tavr.Eight months later, the patient had an exacerbation of chf which was thought to be related to aortic stenosis.A ct performed did not show clearly if there was calcification on the leaflets, but an echocardiogram revealed poor movement of the xt valve cusps.Since the patient¿s condition was deteriorating, bypass surgery and surgical avr were performed.The sapien and sapien xt valves were coalesced with the host tissue, so the operators cut the struts and the valves were explanted.A mechanical valve was implanted.The cusps of the explanted valves were observed to be thickened, hard, and calcified.
 
Manufacturer Narrative
The explanted valve was returned to edwards lifesciences for evaluation.Investigation of the event is ongoing, pending evaluation of the return device.This report represents the 2nd valve (sapien xt); please reference the related manufacturer report no.2015691-2014-00716 for the report regarding the 1st valve (sapien).
 
Manufacturer Narrative
A portion of the explanted sapien xt valve was returned to edwards with frame and leaflet separated.Part of the sapien valve was returned as well with patient anatomy/tissue in-growth on the leaflet and frame.During visual inspection it was observed that a portion of the valve was returned in two parts, a portion of the leaflet and two struts of the frame no abnormalities were observed on the returned valve portions.Severe calcification was noted on the piece of returned leaflet.X-ray imaging confirmed tissue calcification of both the detached leaflet remnant and the tissue still attached to the frame.No relevant functional/dimensional analysis was able to be performed because only a small portion of the valve was returned with a separated portion of the leaflet.Segments of the valve leaflets were sent to a laboratory for histology evaluation.Results from the histology evaluation indicated no significant host inflammatory cell infiltration evident in the leaflet tissue.The calcification was confirmed on the tissue for the returned samples, but there was no apparent reason for the calcification revealed by histological examination.Tissue in unaffected areas appears to be reasonably well preserved.According with the histology evaluation report, tissue calcification-mediated structural valvular deterioration (svd) is a chronic and usually late event for the majority of bioprosthetic heart valves.The evaluation concludes that in patients with renal insufficiency or failure, particularly those requiring dialysis, the elevated blood calcium and phosphorous levels, as well as secondary hyper-parathyroidism, are believed to play an important role in the development of the early bioprosthetic heart valve calcification sometimes observed in this subgroup of patients.In this case, the report of prosthetic valve calcification was confirmed on the returned portions of the edwards sapient xt valve, but no manufacturing defects were identified during this investigation.While the histological evaluation was able to confirm the presence of calcium on the returned pieces, it also determined there was no significant host inflammatory cell infiltration present in the leaflet tissue.In this case, it appears that the events were related to the natural progression of the patient¿s pre-existing conditions.Patient information provided indicates that the patient was on dialysis treatment, which is the most likely root cause of the valve¿s premature calcification and eventual degradation in performance (described as ¿poor movement¿ per the report).In addition, per the (b)(6) ifu, chronic dialysis patients are excluded from the intended use of the sapien xt valve.Complaint histories for all reported events are reviewed against trending control limits on a monthly basis, and any excursions above the control limits are assessed and documented as part of this monthly review.No corrective or preventative actions are required at this time.
 
Search Alerts/Recalls

  New Search  |  Submit an Adverse Event Report

Brand Name
EDWARDS SAPIEN XT TRANSCATHETER HEART VALVE
Type of Device
AORTIC VALVE, PROSTHESIS, PERCUTANEOUSLY DELIVERED
Manufacturer (Section D)
EDWARDS LIFESCIENCES
1 edwards way
irvine CA 92614
Manufacturer (Section G)
EDWARDS LIFESCIENCES LLC
1 edwards way
irvine CA 92614
Manufacturer Contact
deborah deutsch
1 edwards way
irvine, CA 92614
9497564213
MDR Report Key4277385
MDR Text Key5296987
Report Number2015691-2014-02802
Device Sequence Number1
Product Code NPT
Combination Product (y/n)N
Reporter Country CodeJA
PMA/PMN Number
P130009
Number of Events Reported1
Summary Report (Y/N)N
Report Source Manufacturer
Source Type Foreign,Health Professional,User Facility,Company Representative
Reporter Occupation Physician
Type of Report Initial,Followup
Report Date 11/05/2014
1 Device was Involved in the Event
1 Patient was Involved in the Event
Is this an Adverse Event Report? Yes
Is this a Product Problem Report? No
Device Operator Health Professional
Device Expiration Date06/14/2015
Device Model Number9300TFX23J
Was Device Available for Evaluation? Device Returned to Manufacturer
Date Returned to Manufacturer11/07/2014
Is the Reporter a Health Professional? Yes
Initial Date Manufacturer Received 02/02/2015
Initial Date FDA Received11/25/2014
Supplement Dates Manufacturer ReceivedNot provided
Supplement Dates FDA Received02/13/2015
Was Device Evaluated by Manufacturer? Device Not Returned to Manufacturer
Date Device Manufactured07/30/2013
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;
-
-