|
H11: additional manufacturer narrative: the subject device is not available for evaluation, as it remains implanted in the patient.The investigation is still in progress; therefore, a conclusion has yet to be established.A supplemental report will be submitted accordingly upon investigation completion.
|
|
It was reported that a patient with a 27mm 11500a aortic valve underwent an emergent valve-in-valve procedure after an implant duration of four (4) years, six (6) months due to calcification and critical stenosis.The patient was initially admitted for cardiogenic shock, acute on chronic hfref secondary to stenosis.The procedure was performed with a 29mm non-edwards transcatheter valve.
|
|
H11: additional manufacturer narrative: updated sections: b4, g3, g6, h2, h6 (type of investigation, investigation findings, and investigation conclusions).The device history record (dhr) review was completed, and this device passed all manufacturing and sterilization inspections prior to release for distribution.There were no issues identified that would have impacted this event.Engineering evaluation summary: per (b)(4), svd is a logical and expected consequence of the chemical, mechanical, and immunological processes associated with bhv implantation.The common endpoint of all these factors is calcification and degradation.Svd is an acquired condition, intrinsic to bioprosthetic valves, characterized by deterioration of the leaflets or supporting structures, leading to thickening, calcification, tearing, or disruption of the prosthetic valve materials.These changes result in valvular dysfunction manifesting as stenosis and/or regurgitation with a consequent drop in hemodynamic efficacy of the valve.Prior investigations and extensive literature review have shown that svd is predominantly related to patient factors and implant duration rather than to manufacturing issues.Events related to device design, manufacturing, or use error tend to manifest at an earlier implant duration.A device history record (dhr) review was performed, and no relevant non-conformances were identified.Or unable to be performed as no s/n was provided.There is no evidence to suggest a manufacturing defect caused or contributed to the reported event.Based on the information available, the most likely root cause is patient factors, including coronary artery disease (cad), history of coronary artery bypass graft (cabg), diabetes mellitus (dm) and hyperlipidemia (hld).
|