|
Edwards received notification of a transcatheter tricuspid valve replacement (ttvr) procedure involving the evoque system where a right ventricular (rv) perforation occurred.Pericardiocentesis was performed first, but accessing the pericardium proved challenging and took longer than usual.The patient was subsequently converted to surgery and underwent open heart surgery for repair of the laceration with suture and was in stable condition.However, one or two days post procedure the patient expired.Perforation likely occurred during valve crossing and did not progress beyond that point.The team decided to reposition the probe and equipment to the opposite side, moving underneath the catheter.During this process, something (possibly the lead shield) unintentionally bumped the delivery system, likely pushing the wire into the ventricle.Subsequently, a drop in pressure was observed either during crossing or shortly thereafter, and effusion was identified once the machines were restarted.Initial guidewire placement was within the posterior pocket.The wire curl was along the posterior wall in relation to the anatomy.At the time the perforation occurred, the system had been advanced into position and imaging was planned to confirm positioning and trajectories.No intentional advancement of the guidewire to obtain height or navigational maneuvers involving excessive force were reported.
|
|
The following sections were updated/corrected/added: b4, g3, g6, h2, h6, and h11.Additional type of investigation codes that were unable to be added in h6: labelling review.The reported complaint for delivery system and/or guidewire perforation of atrial/ventricular wall was confirmed with empirical evidence.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.Available information suggests that the guidewire interaction with the right ventricular (rv) wall during delivery system crossing contributed to the reported event.No device malfunction was identified.The delivery system and guidewire functioned as intended, with no evidence of structural defect or failure.The injury was attributed to procedural handling, specifically the unintended guidewire advancement resulting from external contact with the delivery system, leading to rv wall perforation.Since no manufacturing non-conformances were found and no labeling, training, or ifu deficiencies were identified, no preventative or corrective actions were required.
|