| Model Number |
3300TFX |
| Medical Device Problem Codes |
Adverse Event Without Identified Device or Use Problem (2993); Insufficient Device Problem Information (3190)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Codes |
Chest Pain (1776); Insufficient Information (4580)
|
| Date of Event |
07/28/2025
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Serious Injury
|
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
H11: additional manufacturer narrative: the investigation is still in progress; therefore, a conclusion has yet to be established.A supplemental report will be submitted accordingly upon investigation completion.Edwards will continue to review and monitor all reported events.Trends are monitored on a monthly basis and if action is required, appropriate investigation will be performed.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
It was learned through implant patient registry that a patient with a 27mm 3300tfx aortic valve was explanted after an implant duration of 6 years, 4 months due to unknown reasons.The explanted valve was replaced with a 27mm 11500a inspiris resilia valve.Edwards lifesciences maintains an implant patient registry.This registry is a patient tracking mechanism for serialized edwards implantable devices (bioprosthetic heart valves and annuloplasty rings), rather than a true post-market surveillance registry.Through the registry, edwards is notified when these devices are implanted.In addition, patient and/or device status may be reported to the registry via the implantation data cards.The information is received from various sources (e.G.Surgeon, hospital, and patient family members) and is not received in the form of a conventional 'customer complaint'.The information reported may or may not be related to the edwards device.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
It was learned through implant patient registry and investigation that a patient with a 27mm 3300tfx aortic valve was explanted after an implant duration of 6 years, 4 months due to pannus.Patient presented with chest pain.The explanted valve was replaced with a 27mm 11500a inspiris resilia valve.Patient was sent to recovery and discharged on pod#8.This is a 40-year-old male patient: edwards lifesciences maintains an implant patient registry.This registry is a patient tracking mechanism for serialized edwards implantable devices (bioprosthetic heart valves and annuloplasty rings), rather than a true post-market surveillance registry.Through the registry, edwards is notified when these devices are implanted.In addition, patient and/or device status may be reported to the registry via the implantation data cards.The information is received from various sources (e.G.Surgeon, hospital, and patient family members) and is not received in the form of a conventional 'customer complaint'.The information reported may or may not be related to the edwards device.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
H11: additional manufacturer narrative: updated sections: b7, g3, g6, h2, h6 (type of investigation) corrected sections: b5, h6 (component code, clinical code, device code, investigation findings and investigation conclusions).Pannus is a non-immune inflammatory reaction of the body to the implanted prosthesis, characterized by proliferation of fibroelastic tissue and collagen, with a starting point in the suture area and subacute or chronic centripetal evolution.Pannus can have both beneficial and harmful effects depending on the amount of growth and location.A small amount of host tissue growth over the suture line is expected and is needed to form a non-thrombogenic surface and complete the healing process after device implantation.In contrast, an excessive amount of pannus growth can cause nonstructural dysfunction that may require intervention.Host tissue growth can extend onto the cusp surfaces leading to thickening of the cusps, cusp retraction or curling, leaflet immobility, and/or abnormal coaptation, potentially resulting in valvular regurgitation, elevated gradients, and/or stenosis.Pannus/host tissue overgrowth is most likely due to patient factors and is unlikely to be related to a manufacturing non-conformance.There is no evidence to suggest a manufacturing defect caused or contributed to the reported event.The most likely root cause is patient factors.A device history record (dhr) review is not performed because there is no allegation of a malfunction which could be related to a manufacturing non-conformance and/or one was not suspected or confirmed through investigation; no labeling non-conformance/deficiency; no device-related infection; and no evidence of a product failure with regard to design, reliability, or use error.Edwards will continue to review and monitor all reported events.Trends are monitored on a monthly basis and if action is required, appropriate investigation will be performed.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|
|