|
The manufacturer was notified through patient tracking on (b)(6) 2016 about the following: on (b)(6) 2016, mitroflow dla size 27, sn# (b)(4) was implanted at aortic position.On (b)(6) 2016, crown prt, size 25, sn# (b)(4) was implanted at the same aortic position at same hospital.No further information was provided.
|
|
A review of the device history record for the mitroflow bioprosthetic pericardial heart valve, model dla27, s/n (b)(4) as it relates to the reported event, was performed.The review confirmed that the device was within specifications at the time of manufacture and release.The manufacturer was unable to obtain further information about this case, despite attempts to follow up.However, based on the document review performed, no manufacturing deficits were identified.Furthermore, according to the information available, the mitroflow dla27 was explanted and replaced with a crown cna25.Based on this information, it is possible that mis-sizing contributed to this event; however, without further information the root cause of the event cannot be confirmed.As the device was not returned for analysis, no further investigation can be performed at this time.Should additional information become available at a later date, or if the device is returned for analysis, appropriate investigative actions will be taken.Unable to follow up; not returned.
|