As reported by the field clinical specialist (fcs), during a transfemoral valve in valve tavr procedure with a 26mm sapien 3 ultra valve in a non-edwards valve, the commander delivery system balloon ruptured near the final one to two cc of fluid for a nominal prep.The balloon appeared to be near the tip and also near the other shoulder of the balloon.The delivery system was slowly pulled back into the descending aorta, and there was slight resistance of the balloon as it was pulled into the esheath.The team was able to safely remove the balloon catheter without injury to the patient.
|
The device was not returned to edwards lifesciences for evaluation, however, a device history record (dhr) review was done and did not reveal any manufacturing nonconformance issues that would have contributed to the event.A lot history review was performed and revealed no other complaints relating to the reported event were identified.The instructions for use/training manuals were reviewed for guidance/instruction involving the esheath and delivery system 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 complaints for balloon burst and difficulty to withdraw system through esheath were unable to be confirmed as neither the complaint device nor applicable imagery was provided.The complaint description states, '26mm sapien 3 ultra valve in a non edwards valve, the balloon ruptured near the final one to two cc of fluid for a nominal prep.The balloon appeared to be near the tip and also near the other shoulder of the balloon.The delivery system was slowly pulled back into the descending aorta there was slight resistance of the balloon as it was pulled into the esheath.' as a no additional information was provided, a definite root cause of the balloon burst was unable to be determined.However, it is possible the balloon interacted with the pre existing valve upon deployment.While the balloons are sufficiently designed and tested to ensure the burst pressure is at or above the rated burst pressure, a pre existing valve can compromise the structure of the balloon wall via following mechanisms such as puncture, local overstretching, open cell impingement, or stress concentration.As the balloon was burst, the altered balloon profile can be more susceptible to catch on the distal end of sheath tip which would have then led to the experienced retrieval difficulty.Review of available information suggests that patient factors (pre existing valve) may have contributed to the balloon burst while procedural factors (withdrawal of burst balloon) may have contributed to the withdrawal difficulty.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.No corrective or preventative actions are required.
|