|
Investigation: visual inspection: no significant deformations or damage of the valves were detected during the visual inspection.But there were found deposits in the inlet spout of the progav 2.0 and particles in the liquid the shunt system was delivered in.Permeability test: a permeability test has indicated that the progav 2.0 valve has a blockage and that the shuntassistant is permeable.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.Because the progav 2.0 valve is not permeable, a computer controlled test is not possible.The shuntassistant is tested in the vertical positions.The results show that the valve operates not within the accepted tolerance, an accelerated flow was detected.Adjustment test: the progav 2.0 was tested and is adjustable to all specified pressures.Since the shuntassistant is a fixed pressure valve, the adjustment test was not applicable.Braking force and brake function test: the brake functionality test has shown that the brake function of the progav 2.0 valve is fully operational and the braking force is within the given tolerances.Results: first, we performed a visual inspection of the progav 2.0 shunt system.No significant deformations or damage of the valves were detected during the visual inspection.Next, we tested the permeability, adjustability, and opening pressure of the valve, as well as the brake functionality and brake force.The progav 2.0 valve was not permeable.Due to the non-permeability of the valve, a computer controlled test was not possible to further investigate the clinical claim of under-drainage.All other specifications were met.The shuntassistant operated as expected, however the opening pressure of the valve was out of tolerance, an accelerated flow was detected.All other specifications were met.Finally, we have dismantled the valves.Inside both valves we have found build-up of substances (likely protein).Based on our investigation, we confirm the presence of occlusion in the progav 2.0 valve at the time of investigation and an accelerated flow in the shuntassistant.We suspect that the deposits found inside the valves have led to the functional impairment.As described in scientific literature, deposits caused by natural substances present in the liquor, such as protein, blood or tissue particles, are among the known and inevitable risks of hc-therapy by shunt implants.We can exclude a defect at the time of release.The shunt system 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.
|