This is filed to report unintended movement.
It was reported that this was a mitraclip procedure to treat functional mitral regurgitation (mr) with a grade of 2.
It was noted restricted posterior, large left atrium appendix, and short septal lateral diameter.
Imaging of the clip was difficult due to the complex anatomy.
The steerable guide catheter (sgc) crossed the septum pointing towards anterior and the guide and dilator were then guided towards posterior by the wire which was placed in the left upper pulmonary vein.
Therefore the tip of the dilator was a bit deflected.
The sgc was advanced to the mitral valve; however, after rotating the handle clockwise, the guide tip could not curve more posterior.
The cds was the advancing and the clip exited the guide, but the clip was touching the lateral wall.
Therefore, the guide tip was retracted close to the septum the clip was not visible when the cds was advanced into straddling position.
When trying to steer down with maximum guide retraction and a bit under straddled.
M knob was removed, and an attempt was made to under straddle more, but failed.
The + knob of the sgc was applied; however the tip slipped slightly to the right atrium.
The cds could not be positioned.
The procedure was to be aborted, but the clip was not able to be retracted.
Each time the cds was retracted, the lateral wall was coming closer to the septum.
The blood pressure dropped very low, and a pericardial effusion was observed severely impacting the hearts dialostic capacities.
The pe was treated with pericardiocentesis.
The blood pressure improved, but additional blood transfusion was needed.
The cds was able to be removed into the guide, and both the sgc and cds were removed from the patient.
There was visible damage to the lateral left atrium wall.
The procedure was aborted and the patient remained hospitalized and was transferred to heart surgery.
Mitral valve and tricuspid valve repair was successfully performed.
No clips were implanted, and mr is 2.
There was no clinically significant delay in the procedure.
No additional information was provided.
|
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 the reported event.
Additionally, a review of the complaint history identified no similar complaints from the lot.
All available information was investigated and the reported unintended movement of the steerable guide catheter (sgc) appears to be related to user technique/procedural circumstances.
The reported difficult positioning appears to be related to patient conditions.
There is no indication of a product issue with respect to manufacture, design or labeling.
The additional clip delivery system referenced in describe event or problem and concomitant medical products is filed under a separate medwatch report number.
|