Skip to content

Contegra® 200H18 (UDI 00643169298613)Recalls & reported problems

Medtronic, Inc. · CNDT 200H18 CONTEGRA GBR3 HDE TEMP IND · Class f · Implant

Data updated Oct 13, 2026 from official FDA records · Editorial policy

Adverse event reports
2
Deaths reported
0
Injuries reported
2
Recalls naming it
0

Summary

The FDA's MAUDE database contains 2 adverse event reports that list this exact device (DI 00643169298613), received between Apr 22, 2020 and Jun 28, 2024 — classified as 2 injuries.

The most frequently reported specific device problem is “Device Stenosis” (1 report).

Reports come from manufacturers, hospitals and patients and are not verified by the FDA. A report does not prove the device caused the event, and counts can't be used to compare devices or estimate failure rates. How this data works · Data updated Oct 13, 2026.

Reports received per month

Nov 2023: 0 reportsDec 2023: 0 reportsJan 2024: 0 reportsFeb 2024: 0 reportsMar 2024: 0 reportsApr 2024: 0 reportsMay 2024: 0 reportsJun 2024: 1 reportsJul 2024: 0 reportsAug 2024: 0 reportsSep 2024: 0 reportsOct 2024: 0 reportsNov 2024: 0 reportsDec 2024: 0 reportsJan 2025: 0 reportsFeb 2025: 0 reportsMar 2025: 0 reportsApr 2025: 0 reportsMay 2025: 0 reportsJun 2025: 0 reportsJul 2025: 0 reportsAug 2025: 0 reportsSep 2025: 0 reportsOct 2025: 0 reportsNov 2025: 0 reportsDec 2025: 0 reportsJan 2026: 0 reportsFeb 2026: 0 reportsMar 2026: 0 reportsApr 2026: 0 reportsMay 2026: 0 reportsJun 2026: 0 reportsJul 2026: 0 reportsAug 2026: 0 reportsSep 2026: 0 reportsOct 2026: 0 reports2024202520261
Last 36 months. The most recent month may be incomplete.

Most reported problems

Device problems

  • Device Stenosis1
  • Insufficient Device Problem Information1
  • Intravalvular regurgitation1

Patient problems

  • No Information1
  • Pulmonary Valve Insufficiency/ Regurgitation1
  • Pulmonary Valve Stenosis1

Recent adverse event reports

The 2 most recent of 2 reports, in the reporter's own words as published by the FDA.

  • InjuryJun 28, 2024Device Stenosis; Intravalvular regurgitation; Device Stenosis; Intravalvular regurgitation

    MEDTRONIC RECEIVED INFORMATION THAT 7 YEARS AND 2 MONTHS POST IMPLANT OF THIS 18MM PULMONARY VALVED CONDUIT IMPLANTED IN A THEN 4 YEAR OLD PEDIATRIC PATIENT, IT WAS EXPLANTED AND REPLACED WITH A 22MM CONDUIT OF THE SAME MODEL. THE REASON FOR REPLACEMENT WAS REPORTED AS PULMONARY STENOSIS AND PULMONARY REGURGITATION. NO ADDITIONAL ADVERSE PATIENT EFFECTS WERE REPORTED.

    Patient problems: Pulmonary Valve Insufficiency/ Regurgitation; Pulmonary Valve Stenosis

    MAUDE report 19633494 ↗
  • InjuryApr 22, 2020Insufficient Device Problem Information; Insufficient Device Problem Information

    MEDTRONIC RECEIVED INFORMATION THAT 4 YEARS AND 3 MONTHS POST IMPLANT OF THIS 18MM PULMONARY VALVED CONDUIT IN A (B)(6) PEDIATRIC PATIENT, IT WAS EXPLANTED AND REPLACED WITH A 20MM PULMONARY VALVED CONDUIT OF THE SAME MODEL. THE REASON FOR REPLACEMENT WAS NOT REPORTED. NO ADDITIONAL ADVERSE PATIENT EFFECTS WERE REPORTED.

    Patient problems: No Information

    MAUDE report 9985493 ↗

Other pulmonic valved conduit devices

All pulmonic valved conduit devices →

Sources and updates

How reports and recalls are matched · Editorial policy · Report an error on this page