|
This complaint was reopened in reference to (b)(4).Investigation: the valve was received submersed in an unidentified liquid.At the time of submission for investigation, the valve was set to pressure range 6 cmh2o.Visual inspection: no significant deformations or damage of the valve were detected during the visual inspection.Result: first we performed a visual inspection with valve.We could not detect any deformations or other abnormalities.In the visual inspection of the valve, we could not detect any apparent damage.It was possible to adjust the valve up and down again in steps of 5 cmh2o.To proof if the brake function is full in place we carried out a brake function test.The investigation has shown that the brake function is present.In the further course of the investigation, we tested the valve positively to permeability.Given the fact that during the treatment with shunts the following complications may arise (as described in the literature): infections, blockages caused by protein and/or blood in the cerebrospinal fluid, we decided to dismantle the valve.Inside the progav 2.0 we found some deposits or substances of protein, which might could be the reason for complications with the adjustability in the past.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 actions required.
|