• 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 EDWARDS SAPIEN 3 TRANSCATHETER; 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 EDWARDS SAPIEN 3 TRANSCATHETER; AORTIC VALVE, PROSTHESIS, PERCUTANEOUSLY DELIVERED Back to Search Results
Model Number 9600TFX23A
Device Problem Insufficient Information (3190)
Patient Problems Stenosis (2263); Insufficient Information (4580)
Event Date 01/09/2023
Event Type  Injury  
Event Description
As reported by implant patient registry, approximately 2 years and 6 months post tavr, a patient underwent explant surgery of their 23mm sapien 3 valve for unknown reasons.The valve was replaced with an edwards surgical valve.
 
Manufacturer Narrative
Investigation is ongoing.Device evaluated by mfr: not returned.
 
Manufacturer Narrative
A supplemental mdr is being submitted due to engineering evaluation findings.Sections b4, g3, g6, h2, h6: type of investigation, investigation findings, investigation conclusions and h10 has been updated.The device was not returned to edwards lifesciences for evaluation.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 this event is not required at this time.The complaint for "post-implantation - stenosis" was confirmed based on provided medical records.A review of dhr, lot history, and complaint history did not identify any manufacturing non-conformances that would have contributed to the reported event.Additionally, no ifu/training manual inadequacies were identified.During the manufacturing process, all sapien s3 valves are 100% visually inspected for defects and 100% functionally tested for proper coaptation under physiological backpressure conditions prior to release for distribution.Therefore, it is highly unlikely that a manufacturing defect contributed to the event.As reported, "approximately 2 years and 6 months post tavr, a patient underwent explant surgery of their 23mm sapien 3 valve.The valve was replaced with an edwards surgical valve.Upon review of medical records received, the device was explanted due to stenosis." per the instruction for use (ifu), valve stenosis is a potential risk associated with bioprosthetic heart valves.Per the valve academic research consortium (varc), valve stenosis can result from a number of factors, including pannus, calcification, support structure deformation (out-of-round configuration), trauma (cardia-pulmonary resuscitation, blunt chest trauma), endocarditis, prosthetic valve thrombosis, and native leaflet prolapse impeding prosthetic leaflet motion.Stenosis of an implanted valve may be a manifestation of structural valve deterioration (svd).This term refers to changes intrinsic to the valve, and can include failure modes such as wear, calcification, leaflet tear, stent creep, leaflet disruption, or leaflet retraction.Svd may be mild and not require any intervention or it may be moderate to severe.It can cause the heart to work harder to eject blood from the ventricle.Depending on severity it could be an indication for valve replacement or medical intervention.Tissue calcification is a well-recognized failure mode of bioprosthetic valves.The mechanisms for bioprosthetic heart valve tissue calcification are not fully understood.Many factors can contribute to the onset and propagation of calcification including patient related (e.G.Patient age, disease state, immune status, and other co-morbidities), pharmacological, and intrinsic properties of the valve itself.Due to insufficient information, a definitive root cause was unable to be determined at this time.No ifu/labeling/training manual inadequacies were identified.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.Therefore, no corrective or preventative action nor pra is required at this time.
 
Search Alerts/Recalls

  New Search  |  Submit an Adverse Event Report

Brand Name
EDWARDS SAPIEN 3 TRANSCATHETER
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 Key16364007
MDR Text Key309409376
Report Number2015691-2023-10765
Device Sequence Number1
Product Code NPT
UDI-Device Identifier00690103194340
UDI-Public(01)00690103194340(17)211116
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,Company Representative
Reporter Occupation Physician
Type of Report Initial,Followup,Followup
Report Date 04/03/2023
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? No
Device Operator Health Professional
Device Expiration Date11/16/2021
Device Model Number9600TFX23A
Was Device Available for Evaluation? No
Is the Reporter a Health Professional? Yes
Was the Report Sent to FDA? No
Initial Date Manufacturer Received 01/19/2023
Initial Date FDA Received02/13/2023
Supplement Dates Manufacturer Received02/15/2023
03/29/2023
Supplement Dates FDA Received03/13/2023
04/03/2023
Was Device Evaluated by Manufacturer? Device Not Returned to Manufacturer
Date Device Manufactured11/22/2019
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 Age50 YR
Patient SexMale
-
-