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

MAUDE Adverse Event Report: AV-TEMECULA-CT MITRACLIP SYSTEM CLIP DELIVERY SYSTEM NT; MITRACLIP DELIVERY SYSTEM

  • 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
 

AV-TEMECULA-CT MITRACLIP SYSTEM CLIP DELIVERY SYSTEM NT; MITRACLIP DELIVERY SYSTEM Back to Search Results
Catalog Number CDS0501
Device Problem Failure To Adhere Or Bond (1031)
Patient Problem Tissue Damage (2104)
Event Date 01/17/2018
Event Type  Injury  
Manufacturer Narrative
(b)(4).The procedure was aborted after six hours; zero clips were implanted and mr grade was unchanged at grade 4.The patient is in stable condition and breathing independently.There was no additional information provided.The customer reported the clip delivery system was discarded.Investigation is not yet complete.A follow up report will be submitted with all additional relevant information.The steerable guide catheter is filed under a separate medwatch report number.
 
Event Description
This is filed on the clip delivery system to report the torn leaflet and ruptured chord.It was reported that this was a mitraclip procedure to treat grade 4 mixed etiology mitral regurgitation (mr) in a patient with an exceptionally large left atrium (la), elongated fossa and a long, floppy eustachian valve.As the dilator and the steerable guide catheter (sgc) reached the la, the eustachian valve was noted to be wrapped/engaged with the sgc in the right atrium.In the la, two mobile pieces of tissue were noticed on the looped non-abbott guide wire.The sgc and dilator were suspected to have torn the eustachian valve.The dilator was removed and the guide wire was slowly retracted while strongly aspirating through the sgc.Two pieces of the eustachian valve were removed from the anatomy, one on the guide wire, the other was in the hemostatic valve of the sgc.As a precaution, a filter was placed during the procedure via the radial artery to prevent any possible embolization.The dilator and sgc were prepared and inspected; these performed fine so the procedure continued and the clip delivery system (cds) was advanced to the la.Visualizing the mitraclip was very challenging due to the large la.Grasping was unexpectedly a challenge.There was some prolapse on the anterior medial leaflet and what appeared to be an adequate posterior medial leaflet (pml) with some mitral annular calcification.The pml (very thin, restricted, calcified, frail leaflet) may have already had a small flail chord.After a few grasp attempts, the pml was suspected to have torn and a chord ruptured from the grasping attempt.This may have worsened the pre-existing flail.Other attempts to grasp elsewhere on the valve were made, but there was no mr reduction as there was no pml tissue to grasp at the site of maximum mr.The undeployed cds was removed from the anatomy.
 
Manufacturer Narrative
(b)(4).The device was not returned for analysis.A review of the lot history record identified no manufacturing nonconformities issued to the reported lot that would have contributed to this event.Review of the complaint history identified no other incidents reported for failure to adhere or bond from this lot.The reported patient effect of mitral valve injury (tissue damage) as listed in the mitraclip system instructions for use, is a known possible complication associated with mitraclip procedures.The reported failure to adhere or bond (difficulty grasping the leaflets) was related to the challenging patient anatomy (an exceptionally large left atrium, elongated fossa, a long, floppy eustachian valve, very thin, possibly fragile, restricted posterior leaflet and mitral annular calcification) and procedural circumstances, such as, difficulties visualizing the clip.The reported tissue damage appears to be related to procedural circumstances (maneuvers related to grasping attempts since the patient had a very challenging anatomy).There is no indication of a product quality issue with respect to design, manufacturing, or labeling of the device.
 
Search Alerts/Recalls

  New Search  |  Submit an Adverse Event Report

Brand Name
MITRACLIP SYSTEM CLIP DELIVERY SYSTEM NT
Type of Device
MITRACLIP DELIVERY SYSTEM
Manufacturer (Section D)
AV-TEMECULA-CT
abbott vascular
26531 ynez road
temecula CA 92591 4628
Manufacturer (Section G)
MENLO PARK, CA REG# 3005070406
abbott vascular
26531 ynez rd.
temecula CA 92591 4628
Manufacturer Contact
connie speck
abbott vascular
26531 ynez rd.
temecula, CA 92591-4628
9519143996
MDR Report Key7246139
MDR Text Key99181869
Report Number2024168-2018-00873
Device Sequence Number1
Product Code NKM
Combination Product (y/n)N
Reporter Country CodeUS
PMA/PMN Number
P100009
Number of Events Reported1
Summary Report (Y/N)N
Report Source Manufacturer
Source Type company representative,health
Reporter Occupation Health Professional
Remedial Action Other
Type of Report Initial,Followup
Report Date 05/01/2018
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? Yes
Device Operator Health Professional
Device Expiration Date06/02/2018
Device Catalogue NumberCDS0501
Device Lot Number70602U196
Was Device Available for Evaluation? No
Is the Reporter a Health Professional? Yes
Initial Date Manufacturer Received 01/17/2018
Initial Date FDA Received02/06/2018
Supplement Dates Manufacturer Received04/27/2018
Supplement Dates FDA Received05/01/2018
Was Device Evaluated by Manufacturer? Device Not Returned to Manufacturer
Date Device Manufactured06/01/2017
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;
Patient Age79 YR
Patient Weight78
-
-