|
The certificate of assurance for pulmonary valve & conduit (sgpv00) #(b)(6) was reviewed.All attributes identified during inspection were documented appropriately on the certificate of assurance (coa).There are no rejectable attributes per cardiac allograft attributes.During the final inspection of this graft, per sub-assembly, inspection; graft, cardiac and vascular, the dilator should fully occupy the valve orifice at the level of the basal ring and should fully engage the annular circumference at the basal ring and fit without distention.As part of inspection of the graft, the final label measurements are determined by the inspector.The inspector¿s training records were reviewed, and the technician was found to be appropriately trained at the time the task was performed.No findings were identified that could have contributed to the reported event.No operative notes are available at this time and no explanted tissue was returned for evaluation.Per the implant summary database, this sgpv00 was implanted on (b)(6) 2019 in a 2.7-year-old male.The location and reason for the implant and the subsequent explant remain unknown.Additionally noted, this valve was explanted 5 years later (b)(6) 2025 and replaced with another artivion homograft during the same procedure.Our labeling lists known adverse events related to the use of homografts; many of which may lead to the explant and replacement as was performed in this case.Reoperation in this pediatric cardiac population is not an unexpected occurrence and may be attributed to somatic outgrowth.There are no additional details available for the time frame between the original implant in 2019 and the procedure performed in 2025.Given the limited information available, the root cause of the reported explant is not known.Adequate precautions are provided in our labeling.An explant occurring 5 years after implant is not uncommon and demonstrates the homograft performed within expectations.The sg cryopreserved human tissue a/dfmea was reviewed.The reported event is addressed in hazard step/item #: a.5 ¿ 2a, 4a, 7a, 13a, and 14a.The sg cryopreserved human tissue pfmea was reviewed.The reported tissue was not returned for evaluation.A review of the tpl report for sid#11212948 found no related issues.The reported event will continue to be monitored for trends.No updates to the rmf are needed in response to this complaint.Risk has been reduced as low as possible and overall residual risk is acceptable.Given the limited information available, the root cause of the reported explant is not known.Adequate precautions are provided in our labeling.An explant occurring 5 years after implant is not uncommon and demonstrates the homograft performed within expectations.There is no indication that an error or deficiency occurred at artivion- formerly cryolife/jotec and the ifu adequately communicates risk.This complaint was reviewed for a capa evaluation and a capa is not warranted at this time.Field assurance will continue to monitor similar complaints to determine if additional actions are warranted; however, at this time no further actions are necessary.This report is being submitted as required by federal regulations and does not constitute an admission that the device caused or contributed to the reported event.Furthermore, this report reflects the event as alleged by the complainant and does not imply that the information reported to artivion is accurate or has been confirmed by artivion.
|