|
As reported by a field clinical specialist (fcs), during a tmvr procedure with a 20mm sapien 3 valve, the valve had mild to moderate mitral regurgitation (mr) post-implant.The ic decided to post-dilate which unfortunately made the mr worse, so made the decision to re-valve this patient's mitral valve.A second 20mm sapien looked great with no leak and 2mmhg gradient.Per additional information provided by the fcs, it is unknown whether the regurgitation was pvl or central.''there could have been a bit of ''frozen leaflet'' happening, which was the cause for the leak.'' the fcs indicated the root cause could be due to a ''small valve, perhaps under deployed.'' the patient had moderate annular calcification with a 17mm minimum luminal diameter.
|
|
A supplemental mdr is being submitted due to additional information from a product investigation.The following sections of this report have been updated: b.4, g.3, g.6, h.2 and h.6.The events reported are anticipated in the risk management documentation for transcatheter heart valve procedures.A previous investigation into this type of event is captured in an edwards lifesciences technical summary and applies to this complaint.Additional assessment of the failure modes are not required at this time.The device was not returned for evaluation.Due to the unavailability of the complaint device, engineering was unable to perform any visual inspection, functional testing, or dimensional analysis.Per the technical summary, the instructions for use (ifu), training manuals and current risk mitigations have been reviewed.No inadequacies have been identified with regards to warnings, contraindications, and the directions/conditions for the successful use of the device.The complaints for regurgitation unknown and leaflet motion restricted were confirmed according to the fcs report.According to the technical summary, extensive investigations have confirmed that no device malfunctions or manufacturing nonconformances were involved in the reported failures.It is possible that one or more patient/procedural factors identified in the technical summary may have contributed to the complaint event.However, due to insufficient information, a definitive root cause cannot be determined.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.Since no edwards product defects or labeling deficiencies were identified, no corrective or preventative action is required.
|