Model Number FR995 |
Device Problem
Material Perforation (2205)
|
Patient Problem
No Known Impact Or Consequence To Patient (2692)
|
Event Date 10/01/2015 |
Event Type
Injury
|
Manufacturer Narrative
|
Product analysis: no product specimen has been returned.Conclusion: attempts to obtain additional information and device return have been unsuccessful.Without return of the product, no definitive conclusions could be drawn regarding the clinical observation.Should the device be returned or additional information become available, a supplemental report will be submitted.The event date is approximate, as attempts to gather the actual date have been unsuccessful.(b)(4).
|
|
Event Description
|
Medtronic received information that following implant of this bioprosthetic aortic root valve, it was explanted due to a perforation of the valve.The implant duration was not provided.No adverse patient effects were reported.
|
|
Manufacturer Narrative
|
Medtronic received additional information that this event occurred three years, seven months following implant of this bioprosthetic aortic root valve.Upon explant a perforation was observed in the aortic root at the coronary portion of the valve, straight above both coronary vessels.Date of event updated in device model #, catalog #, serial # and expiration date added.Device implant date added.Device explant date added.
|
|
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.The product specimen was not returned for physical examination; however, a translated histology report and photographic images were received for review.Because the device was sutured and in-situ while the photographs were taken, the reported perforation could not be identified or observed.Based on the information received from the site this event potentially describes a typical pseudoaneurysm event.An extensive review was performed regarding this type of pseudoaneurysm (perforation) which included re-examining the quality of the porcine tissue (tissue thickness), the tissue treatment process and all subsequent manufacturing steps.Based on this review, it was concluded that pseudoaneurysm formation is not directly related to any limitations within the manufacturing process.This investigation revealed no intrinsic evidence to suggest a root cause related to manufacturing.Potential root causes to the reported issue may have been attributed to implant techniques, including: misalignment of coronary arteries resulting in tension on the anastomotic site ¿failure to adequately mobilize the coronary buttons to prevent tension on the anastomoses.Oversizing the anastomotic site ¿ sewing to thin tissue as a result of creating an extensive or low button hole in the sinus of the device.Iatrogenic (needle size too large) - multiple unnecessary needle punctures at the wall and/or coronary button site.Used surgical tissue adhesives, such as bioglue.The use of surgical tissue adhesives could cause undesirable histological effects (i.E.Tissue necrosis) on native aortic tissue.
|
|
Manufacturer Narrative
|
If information is provided in the future, a supplemental report will be issued.
|
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|