|
This complaint was reopened in reference to (b)(4).Manufacturing site evaluation: manufacturing and quality control data the paediav¿ was manufactured by a qualified employee in april 2004.Deviations during assembly did not occur.The valve was sterilized by miethke and released for shipment after final inspection.The valve has a fixed pressure of 9cmh20 in the horizontal and 29 cmh20 in the vertical position.The valve was inspected as article fv287t.All parameters have been inspected and approved during the manufacturing process.All parameters have been assessed as meeting specification.Device examination: the valve was received submersed in an unidentified liquid in the provided returnkit.Visual inspection: no significant deformations or damage to the valve were detected during the visual inspection.Result first, a visual inspection of the paedigav¿.No significant deformations or damage to the valve were detected during the visual inspection.A microscope was used to detect deposits on the catheter inside the connection.A build-up of a substance (likely protein) was observed inside the connection.The paedigav¿ was manufactured in april 2004.During the manufacturing process, the catheter was pressed into the connector.Although the complaint was confirmed, a root cause of the breakage was not able to be determined.However, it is possible that growth-related forces may have caused the catheter to break.Manufacturing defects at the time of release have been excluded.The valve met all specifications of the final inspection when released from christoph miethke (b)(4).No further regulatory actions are required.
|