As reported by a field clinical specialist (fcs), approximately 10 years and 11 months post-implant of a 23 mm sapien valve in the aortic valve via transfemoral approach, the patient has ai regurgitation.The patient had valve in valve with a 23 sapien 3 ultra.The patient was transferred to recovery room.
|
A supplemental mdr is being submitted for correction and additional information.The following sections of this report have been updated: corrected investigation conclusions and investigation findings.Added new information to b.1 report type and h.6 type of investigation.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.Valve regurgitation is a known risk associated with the use of the sapien valve.There is no indication that a design or manufacturing problem contributed to the event occurring after a 5-year implant duration.The complaint was unable to be confirmed due to unavailability of device, imagery and/or medical report.The reported event does not allege a malfunction that could be related to an edwards manufacturing deficiency.A review of ifu/training materials revealed no deficiencies.In this case, ''approximately 10 years and 11 months post-implant of a 23 mm sapien valve in the aortic valve via transfemoral approach, the patient has ai regurgitation.'' per the instructions for use (ifu), valve regurgitation is known potential adverse events associated with bioprosthetic heart valves and the transcatheter valve replacement (thv) procedure.Regurgitation which develops progressively over time can be due to several issues including patient-related factors or structural valve deterioration, such as calcification, non-calcific degeneration, leaflet thickening or fibrosis, or a combination of these.Regurgitation may also develop progressively if host fibrotic tissue, or pannus, grows onto the bioprosthetic valve.Pannus, a cause of nonstructural dysfunction, may interfere with the functionality of the device by restricting the leaflet motion leading to abnormal coaptation.Due to insufficient information provided, the root cause cannot be determined 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.No ifu/labeling/training manual inadequacies were identified.Therefore, no corrective or preventative action nor product risk assessment is required at this time.
|