|
Edwards received notification of a pascal in mitral position where the implant was attempted and then aborted because pericardial effusion was noted after the device was in the la (left atrium).The device was then bailed out, system removed, and the patient was taken to cvor.The overall procedure was aborted with the mr same as baseline moderate/severe.The patient did not have any symptoms.The effusion did lead to cardiac tamponade.The perforation was believed to be in the la, but it is unable to be confirmed.Pericardial effusion was large and affected mostly the right ventricle.The patient had a pericardiocentesis performed on the table in the cath lab and was placed on ecmo to be transferred to open heart surgery.
|
|
The following sections were updated/corrected/added: b4, d4, g3, g6, h2, h4, h6 and h11.Additional h6 type of investigation code: labelling review.The complaint for inability or difficulty to insert device into transseptal puncture location was confirmed with empirical evidence based on the information provided by edwards clinical specialist.No manufacturing non-conformities were identified based on the information provided by the clinical specialist present at the case.The device history record review was completed, and this device passed all manufacturing and sterilization inspections.No nonconformances related to the complaint event were identified.Since no edwards defect was identified, corrective or preventative actions are not required.As the complaint device or procedural imaging was not provided for evaluation, a definite root cause is unable to be determined.
|