MAUDE Adverse Event Report: EDWARDS LIFESCIENCES EDWARDS SAPIEN 3 TRANSCATHETER HEART VALVE; AORTIC VALVE, PROSTHESIS, PERCUTANEOUSLY DELIVERED

Model Number	9600TFX23A
Medical Device Problem Codes	Degraded (1153); Insufficient Device Problem Information (3190)
Health Effect - Clinical Code	Insufficient Information (4580)
Date of Event	04/15/2026
Type of Reportable Event	Serious Injury
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
Per the instructions for use (ifu), non-emergent reoperation, emergency cardiac surgery, reoperation, device migration or malposition requiring intervention and device explant are listed as potential risks associated with the device and transcatheter valve replacement (tvr) procedure.The ifu cautions that long-term durability has not been established for the valve.Regular medical follow-up is advised to evaluate valve performance.Accelerated deterioration of the valve due to calcific degeneration may occur in children, adolescents, or young adults and in patients with an altered calcium metabolism.Valve recipients should be maintained on anticoagulant/antiplatelet therapy, except when contraindicated, as determined by their physician.This device has not been tested for use without anticoagulation.A review of edwards lifesciences risk management documentation was performed for this case.The reported event is an anticipated risk of the transcatheter heart valve procedure, additional assessment of this adverse event is not required at this time.Valve reintervention may be due to valve dysfunction (e.G., severe, or clinically significant paravalvular leak, central leak, significant malposition, early/late endocarditis, thrombosis, structural valve deterioration or degeneration) and/or other reasons unrelated to the edwards devices (e.G., treatment of other patient comorbidities).During the manufacturing process, all sapien valves (all models) are 100% visually inspected for defects and 100% tested under physiological backpressure conditions prior to release for distribution.Therefore, it is highly unlikely that a manufacturing defect or device malfunction contributed to the event.In this case, despite multiple investigational attempts, it was not possible to obtain additional details regarding this event.Due to limited information, a definitive root cause was unable to be determined at this time.At the time of this report, the information available does not reasonably suggest there was a malfunction of the edwards device or that the use or miss-use of the device caused or contributed to the event.There is no allegation of deficiencies related to the identity, quality, durability, reliability, safety, labeling effectiveness, or performance of this edward device.Should additional information become available, the information will be reviewed, and the file updated accordingly.The ifu and training manuals have been reviewed and no inadequacies have been identified with regards to warnings, contraindications, and the directions/conditions for the successful use of the device.Complaint histories for all reported events are reviewed against trending control limits monthly, and any excursions above the control limits are assessed and documented as part of this monthly review.As such, neither a product risk assessment, nor corrective or preventative actions are required at this time.
Event or Problem Description
As reported by implant patient registry, approximately six years and seven months post implantation of a 23mm sapien 3 valve in the aortic position, the device was explanted and replaced with a surgical valve.The reason for the valve explantation is unknown at this time.
Event or Problem Description
According to the medical record, this patient underwent a redo aortic valve replacement (avr) for stenosis and insufficiency of the transcatheter aortic valve replacement (tavr) valve, approximately 6 years and 3 months post implant.It was noted that the coronary heights were too low for a valve in valve procedure.The tavr valve was replaced with a 19mm inspiris valve.A clip occlusion of the left atrial appendage and drainage of large bilateral pleural effusions (pre-existing) was also performed at the time of the surgery.A transesophageal performed approximately 11 months post implant, noted there is thickening of the leaflets, but visualization is impaired by the metal cage, there is mild to moderate central aortic valve regurgitation, gradients are elevated for valve type and size.The pathology report of the explanted valve noted a prosthetic transcatheter aortic valve is a 3.7 x 2.6 x 0.9 cm aggregate of disrupted, tan-yellow, rubbery and waxy, slightly calcified tissue.Embedded in the tissue are two metallic mesh-like structures together measuring 2.3 x 1.9 x 0.9 cm.
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
Update to b5 and b7.Correction to h6; device code, type of investigation, investigation findings, and investigation conclusion.Per the instructions for use (ifu), structural valve deterioration (wear, fracture, calcification, leaflet tear/tearing from the stent posts, leaflet retraction, suture line disruption of components of a prosthetic valve, thickening, stenosis), and device degeneration are known potential risks associated with the use of bioprosthetic heart valves.The ifu cautions that accelerated deterioration of the valve may occur in patients with an altered calcium metabolism.Long-term durability has not been established for the valve.Regular medical follow-up is advised to evaluate valve performance.Structural valve deterioration (svd) may be manifested as stenosis with thickened leaflets.Svd may be mild and not require any intervention or it may be moderate to severe.It can cause the heart to work harder to eject blood from the ventricle.Depending on the severity it could be an indication for valve replacement or medical intervention.Tissue calcification is a common failure mode.The mechanisms for bioprosthetic heart valve tissue calcification are not yet fully understood.Many factors can contribute to the onset and propagation of calcification including patient-related (e.G., patient age, disease state, immune status, and other co-morbidities), pharmacological, and intrinsic properties of the valve itself.It is widely understood that patients with chronic renal disease and prior history of calcific stenosis of the native valve may be predisposed to bioprosthetic calcification.During the manufacturing process, all sapien thv valves are 100% visually inspected for defects and 100% functionally tested for proper coaptation under physiological backpressure conditions prior to release for distribution.Therefore, it is highly unlikely that a manufacturing defect or device malfunction contributed to the event.In this case, there was no allegation or indication a manufacturing non-conformance contributed to this product problem.Investigation results suggest/indicate that patient factors along with the mechanisms listed above may have caused or contributed to this event.A review of edwards lifesciences risk management documentation was performed for this case.The reported event is an anticipated risk of the transcatheter heart valve procedure, additional assessment of this adverse event is not required at this time.Complaint histories for all reported events are reviewed against trending control limits monthly, and any excursions above the control limits are assessed and documented as part of this monthly review.As such, neither a product risk assessment, nor corrective or preventative actions are required at this time.

• Brand Name: EDWARDS SAPIEN 3 TRANSCATHETER HEART VALVE
• Common Device Name: AORTIC VALVE, PROSTHESIS, PERCUTANEOUSLY DELIVERED
• Manufacturer (Section D): EDWARDS LIFESCIENCES; 1 edwards way; irvine CA 92614
• Manufacturer (Section G): EDWARDS LIFESCIENCES; 1 edwards way; irvine CA 92614
• Manufacturer Contact: renee van dorne ; 1 edwards way; irvine, CA 92614 ; 9492506385
• MDR Report Key: 25364580
• Report Number: 2015691-2026-15742
• Device Sequence Number: 15948820
• Product Code: NPT
• UDI-Device Identifier: 00690103194340
• UDI-Public: (01)00690103194340(17)210913
• Combination Product (Y/N): N
• Initial Reporter State: MO
• Initial Reporter Country: US
• PMA/510(K) Number: P140031
• Number of Events Summarized: 1
• Summary Report (Y/N): N
• Device Implanted Year: 2020
• Serviced by Third Party (Y/N): Unknown
• Reporter Type: Manufacturer
• Report Source: Health Professional,User Facility,Company Representative
• Initial Reporter Occupation: Physician
• Type of Report: Initial,Followup
• Report Date (Section B): 06/18/2026

1 Device was Involved in the Event

1 Patient was Involved in the Event

• Is this an Adverse Event Report?: Yes
• Is this a Product Problem Report?: No
• Operator of Device: Health Professional
• Device Expiration Date: 09/13/2021
• Device Model Number: 9600TFX23A
• Was Device Available for Evaluation?: No
• Is the Reporter a Health Professional?: Yes
• Was the Report Sent to FDA?: No
• Type of Report(Section G): Thirty-Day
• Initial Date Received by Manufacturer: 05/12/2026
• Supplement Date Received by Manufacturer: 06/02/2026
• Initial Report FDA Received Date: 06/02/2026
• Supplement Report FDA Received Date: 06/18/2026
• Was Device Evaluated by Manufacturer? (Y/N): No
• Date Device Manufactured: 09/14/2019
• Is the Device Labeled for Single Use? (Y/N): Yes
• Is This a Single-Use Device that was Reprocessed and Reused on a Patient? (Y/N): No
• Usage of Device: Initial
• Patient Sequence Number: 1
• Outcome Attributed to Adverse Event: Required Intervention
• Patient Age: 82 YR
• Patient Sex: Female