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

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

  • 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
 

EDWARDS LIFESCIENCES COMMANDER DELIVERY SYSTEM; AORTIC VALVE, PROSTHESIS, PERCUTANEOUSLY DELIVERED Back to Search Results
Model Number 9600LDS29A
Device Problem Difficult to Remove (1528)
Patient Problem Perforation of Vessels (2135)
Event Date 08/16/2022
Event Type  Injury  
Event Description
Edwards received notification from a field clinical specialist that a patient underwent a right sided transfemoral viv tmvr in a surgical valve.As reported, post deployment of a 29mm s3 valve, the 16 fr esheath plus seam split (liner torn) as the commander delivery system was withdrawn through it.The right common iliac vein was perforated and ballooned.Ultimately a stent was implanted to repair the vessel perforation.A new esheath was used to fracture the previous non-edwards surgical valve.
 
Manufacturer Narrative
The investigation is ongoing.A supplemental report will be completed upon completion.
 
Manufacturer Narrative
The device was not returned for evaluation as it was remained implanted/discarded.Therefore, a no product return engineering evaluation was performed.Imagery was provided and the following was observed: 3mensio report; calcification was present in the patient's annulus.However, there was no relevant imagery of access vessel provided.A review of edwards lifesciences risk management documentation was performed for this case.The reported event is an anticipated risk of the transcatheter heart valve procedure, additional assessment of the failure mode is not required at this time.The complaint of difficulty to withdraw delivery system through sheath was unable to be confirmed as neither the complaint device nor applicable imagery was provided for evaluation.Due to the unavailability of the device, engineering was unable to perform any visual, functional, or dimensional analysis.Therefore, a manufacturing non-conformance was unable to be determined.A review of the dhr and lot history did not provide any indications that a manufacturing non-conformance would have contributed to the complaint.Additionally, a review of the ifu and training manuals revealed no deficiencies.Per the complaint description, ''it was learned that there was coaxial alignment of the delivery system upon re-entry into the distal end of the sheath''.Difficulty removing the delivery system through the esheath was encountered.The 3mensio provided did not have any imagery related to the access vessel; therefore, no patient factors could be identified as contributing to the event.The delivery system was said to be withdrawn coaxially through the sheath tip.It's possible the balloon profile of the delivery system was altered due to residual fluid, or the system still retained some flex prior to its retrieval.If so, these factors could have contributed to the reported withdrawal difficulty, ''there was difficulty on withdrawal of delivery system''.It is possible excessive manipulation was used when pulling the delivery system through the sheath tip resulting in the alleged torn liner.However, due to the lack of relevant patient/procedural imagery, a definitive root cause is unable to be determined.No ifu/labeling/training manual inadequacies were identified.Therefore, no corrective or preventative action nor product risk assessment (pra) is required at this time.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.
 
Search Alerts/Recalls

  New Search  |  Submit an Adverse Event Report

Brand Name
COMMANDER DELIVERY SYSTEM
Type of Device
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 Key15396807
MDR Text Key299662961
Report Number2015691-2022-07820
Device Sequence Number1
Product Code NPU
UDI-Device Identifier00690103193961
UDI-Public(01)00690103193961(17)240615(10)64395604
Combination Product (y/n)N
Reporter Country CodeUS
PMA/PMN Number
P140031
Number of Events Reported1
Summary Report (Y/N)N
Report Source Manufacturer
Source Type Health Professional,User Facility,Company Representative
Reporter Occupation Other Health Care Professional
Type of Report Initial,Followup
Report Date 10/27/2022
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 Date06/15/2024
Device Model Number9600LDS29A
Device Catalogue NumberN/A
Device Lot Number64395604
Was Device Available for Evaluation? No
Is the Reporter a Health Professional? Yes
Was the Report Sent to FDA? No
Initial Date Manufacturer Received 08/16/2022
Initial Date FDA Received09/09/2022
Supplement Dates Manufacturer Received10/26/2022
Supplement Dates FDA Received10/27/2022
Was Device Evaluated by Manufacturer? Device Not Returned to Manufacturer
Date Device Manufactured06/16/2022
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 SexFemale
-
-