| Model Number |
PRT-29 |
| Medical Device Problem Code |
Intravalvular regurgitation (4068)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Code |
Aortic Valve Insufficiency/ Regurgitation (4450)
|
| Date of Event |
08/05/2022
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Serious Injury
|
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
Investigation is not yet complete.A follow-up report will be submitted with all additional relevant information.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
It was reported that on (b)(6) 2022,a 29mm portico valve was successfully implanted with mild-moderate paravalvular leak and it was thought that it would resolve over time as the valve settled into the anatomy.On (b)(6) 2022, the patient presented with dyspnea.An echocardiogram was performed and showed moderate central aortic regurgitation.A computed tomography (ct) done showed that that the valve frame looked constrained, which was not seen on post-implant echocardiogram and angiogram.The patient was scheduled for reintervention, however it has not been performed yet.The patient was reported to be in stable condition.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
An event of mild paravalvular leak, moderate central aortic regurgitation and shortness of breath was reported.A returned device assessment could not be performed as the device remains implanted and was not returned for analysis.The device history record was reviewed to ensure that each manufacturing and inspection operation was performed, and the product met all specifications.Based on the information received, the cause of the reported incident could not be conclusively determined.There is no indication of a product quality issue with respect to labeling design or manufacturing of the device.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
It was reported that on (b)(6) 2022, a 29mm portico valve was successfully implanted with mild -moderate paravalvular leak and it was thought that it would resolve over time as the valve settled into the anatomy.The sizing of the valve was 80.3mm perimeter and area 504.4mm and the implant depth was 8mm ncc and lcc and there was there enough calcium distribution.The valve was heavily constrained on first deployment at around 2-3mm deployment with non uniform expansion.Therefore, they went deeper and got better valve expansion.On (b)(6) 2022, the patient presented with dyspnea.An echocardiogram was performed and showed moderate central aortic regurgitation.A computed tomography (ct) done showed that the valve frame looked constrained, which was not seen on post implant echocardiogram and angiogram.The patient is scheduled for reintervention, however it has not been performed yet.The patient was reported to be in stable condition.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|