|
Investigation: visual inspection: no significant deformations or damage of the valve were detected during the visual inspection.Permeability test: a permeability test has shown that the valve is permeable.Adjustment test: this is a fixed pressure valve.An adjustment test is not applicable.Braking force and brake function test: this is a fixed pressure valve.A braking force and brake function test are not applicable.Computer controlled test: to investigate the claim of under-drainage, the opening pressure is measured using a miethke computer controlled testing apparatus which simulates a cerebrospinal fluid flow.The valve is tested in the vertical positions.The results show that the valve operates within the accepted tolerance.Results: first, we performed a visual inspection of the valve.No significant deformations or damage of the valve were detected during the visual inspection.Next, we tested the permeability of the valve.The valve was shown to be permeable.Then we carried out a computer controlled simulated flow test.The measured opening pressure was within the accepted tolerance.Finally, we have dismantled the valve.There were no visible deposits observed inside the valve.Based on our investigation, we are unable to substantiate the claim of under-drainage.At the time of our investigation, the valve was operating within the specified tolerances.We can exclude a defect at the time of release.The valve met all specifications of the final inspection when released from christoph miethke gmbh & co.Kg.No further regulatory actions are required from our point of view.
|
|
It was reported that there was a problem with a shunt assistant 2.0.The surgeon suspected that the valve operates in under-drainage.Patient informations: age: (b)(6), weight: unknown height: unknown, gender: female, date of implantation: (b)(6) 2020 (external hospital), date of removal: (b)(6) 2020.
|