|
This complaint was reopened in reference to (b)(4).Investigation results: visual inspection: no significant deformations or other damage of the valves were detected during the visual inspection.Permeability test: a permeability test has indicated that the valve has a blockage.Adjustment test: the progav was tested and is no longer adjustable.Braking force and brake function test: the brake functionality test has shown that the break function is operational, however the braking force cannot be measured due to the non-adjustability of the valve.Results: first, we performed a visual inspection of the progav.No significant deformations or damage of the value were detected during the visual inspection.Next, we tested the permeability, adjustability, as well as the brake functionally and brake force.The valve was not permeable but it is no longer adjustable.Finally, we have dismantled the valve.Inside the valve we have found significant build-up of substances (likely protein).Based on our investigation, we confirm the presence of occlusion in the value at the time of our investigation.This is likely due to the deposits observed inside the values.As described in scientific literature, the problem encountered is one of the known, inevitable risks of hc-therapy by shunt implants.We can exclude a defect at the time of release.The valve met all specifications of the final inspection when released from christoph miethke (b)(4).No further regulatory actions are required from our point of view.
|
|
It was reported that a progav system was implanted during a procedure performed on (b)(6) 2015.According to the complainant, the progav system was believed to have a blockage.The patient underwent a revision procedure on (b)(6) 2016.The complainant device was returned to the manufacturer for evaluation.No patient complications were reported as a result of the revision procedure.Patient information: height: 68 cm, weight: (b)(6) kg.
|