CRYOVALVE SG - AORTIC VALVE AND CONDUIT SGAV00

MAUDE Adverse Event Report

MAUDE data represents reports of adverse events involving medical devices. This maude entry was filed from a 05,06 report with the FDA on 2014-07-15 for CRYOVALVE SG - AORTIC VALVE AND CONDUIT SGAV00 manufactured by Cryolife, Inc..

Event Text Entries

[4573866] The sgav00 was implanted 11 years ago. The valve and graft were basically non visual, very difficult to distinguish and it was heavily calcified. The patient required a re-do procedure to replace the valve and root.
Patient Sequence No: 1, Text Type: D, B5


[12037145] This investigation is currently ongoing. Any additional information will be provided in the follow-up report.
Patient Sequence No: 1, Text Type: N, H10


[37127846] The sgav00 was implanted 11 years ago. The valve and graft were basically non visual, very difficult to distinguish and it was heavily calcified. The patient required a re-do procedure to replace the valve and root. Additional information was received which stated that "non-visual" meant it was difficult to distinguish leaflet anatomy. The patient did not have prior aortic valves or other tissue products implanted before the sg aortic valve. The valve was implanted as a root replacement and "very difficult to distinguish" was in respect to the conduit valve itself and not the patient's native tissue. The explanted allograft was returned for evaluation. The specimen consisted of multiple tan, yellow and gray fragments of vascular tissue measuring 8 x 10 cm in loose aggregate. Blue suture material was noted in multiple fragments. Several fragments were heavily calcified. Upon microscopic review, there was an abundance of calcification and infrequent focal areas of acute mild hemorrhage. There were also a few focal areas of mixed acute and chronic inflammation, which was predominantly chronic. The vascular wall was thickened and predominantly acellular. The valve leaflets were noted and showed large areas of calcific nodules. The occasional suture hole was also noted. Processing records were reviewed. All attributes noted during inspection were documented appropriately and the allograft met processing specification. A review was performed of the available information. The cryovalve aortic valve allograft was implanted via full root replacement and prior to valve implant the patient had never received any previous allograft tissue. Use of aortic allografts for aortic valve replacement is an excellent option for patients due to the excellent freedom from endocarditis, lack of anticoagulation therapies, being non-thrombogenic, and having superb hemodynamic characteristics. However, over time allografts can undergo calcification and structural valve deterioration (svd), and the valve may be explanted and replaced with another allograft or other aortic prosthesis. Structural valve deterioration is a known, commonly reported cause for valve-related reoperation and valve explant following aortic valve replacement with allograft and bioprosthetic valves. The durability of allograft valves has often been associated with patient age, as younger patients (< 65 years of age) have been reported to exhibit early svd and decreased durability versus older patients. However, the literature regarding the use cryopreserved aortic valve allografts for aortic valve replacement in young patients (< 65 years of age) that have produced favorable, long-term results in respect to freedom from reoperation, freedom from structural valve deterioration (svd), and freedom from explant due to svd. Freedom from explant due to svd in aortic allograft valves has been described in the literature, with several retrospective studies citing rates of 91%-97% at 10 years of follow-up. Similar to the patient in this reported event, the average patient age at time of implant was 53. 5 years old (range of 45-65 years old). According to the literature, explant of an aortic allograft due to structural valve deterioration and calcification 11 years after implantation in a 55 year old patient is not unexpected. Furthermore, histopathologic examination of the returned tissue showed "vascular aortic tissue with abundant calcification. " this finding is consistent with structural valve deterioration. The root cause of the reported event is unknown; however, given the duration of implantation, these findings are not unexpected.
Patient Sequence No: 1, Text Type: N, H10


[37127847] The sgav00 was implanted 11 years ago. The valve and graft were basically non visual, very difficult to distinguish and it was heavily calcified. The patient required a re-do procedure to replace the valve and root.
Patient Sequence No: 1, Text Type: D, B5


MAUDE Entry Details

Report Number1063481-2014-00030
MDR Report Key3935967
Report Source05,06
Date Received2014-07-15
Date of Report2014-07-01
Date of Event2014-07-02
Date Mfgr Received2014-07-01
Date Added to Maude2014-07-15
Event Key0
Report Source CodeManufacturer report
Manufacturer LinkY
Number of Patients in Event0
Adverse Event Flag3
Product Problem Flag3
Reprocessed and Reused Flag3
Health Professional3
Initial Report to FDA3
Report to FDA0
Event Location0
Manufacturer ContactSANDRA O'REILLY
Manufacturer Street1655 ROBERTS BLVD., NW
Manufacturer CityKENNESAW GA 30144
Manufacturer CountryUS
Manufacturer Postal30144
Manufacturer Phone7704193355
Manufacturer G1CRYOLIFE, INC.
Manufacturer Street1655 ROBERTS BLVD., NW
Manufacturer CityKENNESAW GA 30144
Manufacturer CountryUS
Manufacturer Postal Code30144
Single Use3
Previous Use Code3
Event Type3
Type of Report3

Device Details

Brand NameCRYOVALVE SG - AORTIC VALVE AND CONDUIT
Generic NameHEART VALVE ALLOGRAFT
Product CodeOHA
Date Received2014-07-15
Returned To Mfg2014-07-03
Model NumberSGAV00
Lot Number7990860
ID NumberDONOR NUMBER 67095
Device Expiration Date2012-11-01
OperatorPHYSICIAN
Device AvailabilityR
Device AgeDA
Device Eval'ed by MfgrY
Device Sequence No1
Device Event Key0
ManufacturerCRYOLIFE, INC.
Manufacturer Address1655 ROBERTS BLVD., NW KENNESAW GA 30144 US 30144


Patients

Patient NumberTreatmentOutcomeDate
101. Other 2014-07-15

© 2024 FDA.report
This site is not affiliated with or endorsed by the FDA.