|
A supplemental mdr is being submitted for correction and additional information.The following sections of this report have been updated: added new information to h.6 type of investigation, investigation findings and investigation conclusions.The device was not returned to edwards lifesciences for evaluation.Without the device returned for evaluation, visual inspection, functional testing and dimensional analysis were unable to be completed.Imagery was not provided for review.The complaint was unable to be confirmed.Due to the unavailability of the device, engineering was unable to perform any visual, functional, or dimensional analysis.Therefore, a manufacturing non-conformance could not be determined.An existing technical summary written by edwards lifesciences 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, ''the balloon ruptured occurred after all of the volume was inflated into the balloon.'' per the case notes, the patient had ''bulky leaflet calcium, none in annulus.Severe stj calcium.'' 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.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) contributed to the balloon burst.Complaint histories for all reported events are reviewed against trending control limits monthly, and any excursions above the control limits are assessed and documented as part of this monthly review.No ifu/labeling/training manual inadequacies were identified.Therefore, no corrective or preventative action nor product risk assessment is required at this time.
|