|
The pacemaker was received for analysis.Prior to the analysis of the device, the quality documents accompanying the manufacturing process for this pacemaker were re-investigated and all production steps were performed accordingly.Particularly the final acceptance test proved the device functions to be as specified.Upon receipt, the pacemaker was subjected to an electrical incoming inspection.Neither an interrogation nor any anti-bradycardia pacing signals were present, confirming the clinical observation.Therefore, the pacemaker was opened and subjected to further analysis.The visual inspection of the inner assembly showed no anomalies, but the battery was found to be depleted.The battery was disconnected from the electronic module.Using an external power supply, further thorough investigation of the electronic module did not show any anomalies.All therapy functions were available and worked as expected.The current consumption was directly measured and proved to be normal and expected.In addition, a long-term storage test of the electronic module was performed, and the device functionality was continuously monitored.No anomalies were noted during the test.At a next step the battery was sent to the manufacturer for analysis.The manufacturing process for the battery was re-investigated and all production steps were performed accordingly.There was no sign of any inconsistency during the manufacturing process which may be related to the clinical observation.Subsequently the battery was subjected to a visual and an electrical inspection, including x-ray as well as microcalorimetry analysis and confirmed the battery depletion.However, the destructive analysis did not reveal any abnormality which might have led to an early depletion of the battery.In summary, despite the dedicated analysis, the root cause of the early battery depletion could not be determined.The therapeutic functionality of the device was tested with an attached external power supply and proved to be fully functional.
|