MAUDE Adverse Event Report: EDWARDS LIFESCIENCES EDWARDS CERTITUDE DELIVERY SYSTEM; AORTIC VALVE, PROSTHESIS, PERCUTANEOUSLY DELIVERED

Model Number	9630TA20A
Medical Device Problem Code	Burst Container or Vessel (1074)
Health Effect - Clinical Code	No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions (4582)
Date of Event	10/27/2021
Type of Reportable Event	Malfunction
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
Investigation is ongoing.
Event or Problem Description
As reported, during a tao tavr case the 20mm certitude delivery system balloon ruptured during valve deployment when the valve was fully inflated with +3cc's.The decision was made to not post dilate due to patient calcification load and great hemodynamics/echo results.The patient's stj was severely calcified and small with sharp protruding calcification.The team felt the risk of post-dilation outweighed the benefit.The device is not available for return.
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
Per the instructions for use (ifu), balloon rupture is a potential risk of the tavr procedure.The device was not returned for evaluation.A dhr review was performed and did not reveal any manufacturing nonconformance issues that would have contributed to the complaint event.Imagery was provided of the patient's anatomy and the patient's stj had severe calcification present.Transcatheter delivery balloon burst complaints have been previously investigated by edwards and documented in a clinical technical summary written by edwards lifesciences.A detailed root cause analysis revealed that it is very unlikely that a product defect contributes to this type of event.There are extensive manufacturing inspections in place to prevent this type of malfunction (visual and dimensional inspections, leak testing, and functional balloon burst testing performed to every manufactured lot).The thv delivery system balloons are subject to increased risk of burst due to contact with a highly calcified annulus.Analysis revealed that these types of ruptures are typically caused by puncture from calcium on the native aortic valve when the inflated delivery system balloon comes in contact with the native annular calcification at full inflation/deployment.The burst balloon was unable to be confirmed due to unavailability of the complaint device and relevant imagery.Since the device was not returned, engineering was unable to perform any visual, functional, or dimensional analysis, and therefore no manufacturing non-conformances were able to be identified.The existing technical summary has been documented for root cause analysis on balloon bursts in a calcified landing zone.The technical summary provides a rationale as to why it is unlikely that a product defect or manufacturing non-conformance contributed to this type of event, including factors on why deployment of balloons on thv delivery systems are subject to increased risk of burst in a calcified landing zone.As reported and per the imagery provided, 'the patient's stj was severely calcified and small with sharp protruding calcification noted'.The presence of calcification can create a challenging anatomy for balloon inflation.While the balloons are sufficiently designed and tested for rated burst pressures well above their inflation pressure, calcified nodules can compromise the structure of the balloon wall via following mechanisms such as puncture, local overstretching, open cell impingement, or stress concentration.Additionally, it was noted that an additional volume of +3cc was added to the balloon.The prescribed nominal inflation volume is provided in the ifu that was documented in the technical summary.It is possible the balloon was overinflated, subjecting the balloon to pressures high enough to cause the balloon to burst.In addition, the technical summary outlines the extensive manufacturing mitigations in place to prevent this type of malfunction (visual and dimensional inspections, leak testing, and functional balloon burst testing that occurs with every manufactured lot).These inspections and testing further support that it is unlikely that a defect present in manufacturing contributed to the complaint.The technical summary also outlines the instructions for valve deployment.It should be noted that these mitigations are still in place.Review of available information suggests that patient factors (calcification) and procedural factors (over-inflation) contributed to the balloon burst.

• Brand Name: EDWARDS CERTITUDE DELIVERY SYSTEM
• Common Device Name: AORTIC VALVE, PROSTHESIS, PERCUTANEOUSLY DELIVERED
• Manufacturer (Section D): EDWARDS LIFESCIENCES; 1 edwards way; irvine CA 92614
• Manufacturer (Section G): EDWARDS LIFESCIENCES; 1 edwards way; irvine CA 92614
• Manufacturer Contact: renee van dorne ; 1 edwards way; irvine, CA 92614 ; 9492506385
• MDR Report Key: 12849652
• Report Number: 2015691-2021-06414
• Device Sequence Number: 14540647
• Product Code: NPT
• UDI-Device Identifier: 00690103201444
• UDI-Public: (01)00690103201444(17)230517(10)63779061
• Combination Product (Y/N): N
• Initial Reporter State: FL
• Initial Reporter Country: US
• PMA/510(K) Number: P140031
• Number of Events Summarized: 1
• Summary Report (Y/N): N
• Serviced by Third Party (Y/N): Unknown
• Reporter Type: Manufacturer
• Report Source: Health Professional,User Facility,Company Representative
• Initial Reporter Occupation: Physician
• Type of Report: Initial,Followup
• Report Date (Section B): 01/08/2022

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
• Operator of Device: Health Professional
• Device Expiration Date: 05/17/2023
• Device Model Number: 9630TA20A
• Device Lot Number: 63779061
• Was Device Available for Evaluation?: No
• Is the Reporter a Health Professional?: Yes
• Was the Report Sent to FDA?: No
• Type of Report(Section G): Thirty-Day
• Initial Date Received by Manufacturer: 10/27/2021
• Supplement Date Received by Manufacturer: 01/06/2022
• Initial Report FDA Received Date: 11/19/2021
• Supplement Report FDA Received Date: 01/07/2022
• Was Device Evaluated by Manufacturer? (Y/N): Device Not Returned to Manufacturer
• Date Device Manufactured: 05/17/2021
• Is the Device Labeled for Single Use? (Y/N): Yes
• Is This a Single-Use Device that was Reprocessed and Reused on a Patient? (Y/N): No
• Usage of Device: Initial
• Patient Sequence Number: 1
• Patient Sex: Female