|
A supplemental mdr is being submitted for correction and includes additional information based on device evaluation.The following sections of this report have been corrected/updated: h3 (device evaluated by manufacturer), h6 (type of investigation, investigation findings, investigation conclusions) and h10 (provide narrative/data).The device was provided by research & development (r&d) for further evaluation.The device was visually inspected, and it was revealed that the liner was fully expanded.The distal tip was observed to be torn radially along the distal edge of the liner with stretching.All score lines were present.Imagery was also provided for review.Imagery review revealed the distal tip tore radially along the distal edge of the liner.A device history record (dhr) review was performed and did not reveal any manufacturing nonconformance issues that would have contributed to the event.A lot history review was also performed and it did not provide any indication that a manufacturing non-conformance would have contributed to the event.During manufacturing, the device undergoes multiple 100% inspections.In addition, the work order underwent functional product verification testing on a sampling basis as a requirement for lot release.These inspections and tests during the manufacturing process support that it is unlikely that a non-conformance contributed to the reported event.The instructions for use (ifu)/training manuals were reviewed for guidance/instruction involving the esheath usage.Based on the review of the ifu/training manuals, no deficiencies were identified.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 event for esheath distal tip torn was confirmed per evaluation of the returned device.However, no manufacturing nonconformance was identified during the evaluation.A review of the dhr and lot history did not provide any indication that a manufacturing non-conformance would have contributed to the event.A review of the manufacturing mitigations supports that the esheath has proper inspections in place to detect issues related to the event.A review of the ifu/training materials revealed no deficiencies.Furthermore, no abnormalities were noted during device unpacking or preparation.Per the event description, "during testing, a 16fr esheath tore at the distal tip as the 29mm x4 delivery system with crimped 29mm sapien x4 valve passed through the tip." per evaluation of the returned device, the esheath distal tip was observed to be torn radially along the distal edge of the liner.The failure mode is characteristic of sheath tip tear events as described in a previously performed product risk assessment (pra).While a definitive root cause was unable to be determined, previous investigation indicated that the tear is attributed to improper tip expansion, resulting in interference between the valve and sheath tip.As such, it is possible that improper tip expansion contributed to the experienced distal tip tear.In this case, a definitive root cause was unable to be determined; however, improper expansion of the sheath tip during transcatheter heart valve (thv) advancement may have contributed to the event.Complaint histories for all reported events are reviewed against trending control limits on a monthly basis, and any excursions above the control limits are assessed and documented as part of this monthly review.A previous corrective and preventive action (capa) was initiated for this type of event.Additionally, a previous product risk assessment (pra) was performed for this type of event.Further assessment revealed the control limits have not been exceeded.Therefore, no corrective or preventative actions are required at this time.
|