|
The rep was asked on 11/22/2016 if a definitive etiology was determined for the presumed paravalvular leak (pvl) or if it was in fact the unique signature jets and if there was a known current status of patient.He replied same day that ¿the anesthesiologist felt confident that it was not signature jet washes but was indeed a mild to moderate pvl.The surgeon agreed but felt that it was not significant enough to worry about.I have no further information on the patient.¿ the manufacturing records for the onxm-27/29, sn (b)(4), were reviewed and it was confirmed that all records were controlled, available for review, and met all specifications per the device master record.All lots passed functional testing and met release specifications.During the investigation no non-conformances or deviations were noted.The onxmc-25/33, sn (b)(4), was implanted (b)(6) 2016 in the mitral position.Post-surgery echo revealed mild to moderate pvl but was not considered clinically significant and the patient was closed.Pvl is a known risk of prosthetic valve placement in either aortic or mitral positions listed in the instructions for use (ifu).As this diagnosis was made during surgery, this pvl is the consequence of placement rather than any developed tissue pathology.Palatianos, et al.Reported two early (<30 days) pvl's in an on-x study of 117 patients while mcnicholas, et al.Describe this as a rate of 0.7 in an on-x study of 142 mitral patients.In the present case, both anesthesiologist and surgeon decided the severity was not enough to warrant corrective action.
|