|
It was reported that a progav shuntsystem (part # fv446t) was implanted during a procedure performed on an unknown date.According to the complainant, the shunt system was believed to be clogged.The patient underwent a revision procedure and got a progav 2.0 shuntsystem.The complaint device will be return to the manufacturer for evaluation.No patient complications were reported as a result of the revision procedure.Age: 2 years, 7 months.
|
|
Investigation: visual inspection: the following observations were made during the visual inspection: tissue residues on the product, deposits/ particles in the reservoir, and leak in the kink protection of the catheter.Permeability test: the test showed that all products are permeable.Computer control test: the computer controlled test showed the opening pressure of the progav 2.0, at a reference flow rate of 20 ml/h in a horizontal position of the valve, to be 2.60 cmh2o.This is not within the specified tolerance of 8 cmh2o ± 3 cmh2o.An applied pressure of 10 cmh2o, with the device in the horizontal position is expected to have a resultant pressure of 8 cmh2o ± 3 cmh2o.According to our results, we can detect a presence of an accelerated outflow.Additionally, the paedishuntassistant was tested according to standard procedure in the vertical position of the valve.At a fixed opening pressure of 10 cmh2o in the vertical position, a pressure of 10 cmh2o +4/-2 cmh2o is expected.The results indicated that at a reference flow of 20 ml/h in the vertical position, the paedishuntassistant had a pressure of 9.27 cmh2o.This is within the specified tolerance of 10 cmh2o +4/-2 cmh2o.Adjustability test: it was checked whether the valve is fully adjustable within the full range of specified pressure settings (in increments of 5 cmh2o).The progav 2.0 was found to be adjustable to all pressure settings.The paedishuntassistant is a fixed pressure valve, therefore the adjustability test is inapplicable.Braking force and brake function test: the braking force of the progav 2.0 was within the specified tolerance and the brake function operated as expected.Internal inspection of product: in order to verify whether the investigated shunt system was compromised by the known risks of hydrocephalus therapy, e.G.By a build-up of natural substances (protein, blood, or tissue particles) in the cerebrospinal fluid, the valves is/are finally opened with a special tool.After dismantling of the valves, deposits were found in both valves.For more detailed visibility, the proteins/deposits in both valves were colored by using a coloring solution.[coloring solution consisting of coomassi brilliant blue r mixed with 0.6% ethanol and distilled water].Results: based on our investigation results, we have determined that there was an accelerated outflow in the progav 2.0 valve at the time of our investigation.Detected deposits were the cause of the accelerated outflow.The named blockade could be not confirmed.Proteins in the cerebrospinal fluid can influence the function temporarily and are known side effects in hydrocephalus therapy.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.From our point of view, no further regulatory actions are required.
|