|
Investigation: visual inspection: no significant deformations or damage of the valves were detected during the visual inspection.Permeability test: a permeability test has shown that both valves are permeable.Computer controlled test: to investigate the claim of over/under-drainage, the opening pressure is measured using a miethke computer controlled testing apparatus which simulates a cerebrospinal fluid flow.The valves were tested in both the horizontal as well as the vertical position.The results show that the progav 2.0 is operating not within the accepted tolerance in the horizontal position.The shuntassistant 2.0 is operating within the specified tolerances in the vertical position.Adjustment test: the progav 2.0 was tested and could be adjusted in all pressure ranges.Initially, the adjustment was difficult, but after a few attempts it was possible again without any problems.Braking force and brake function test: the brake function operates as expected.However, the breaking force required was not within the specified tolerances.Internal inspection: after opening the valves, deposits could be detected in the progav 2.0 and the shuntassistant 2.0.Results: based on our examination results, we can determine a sluggish adjustability, an increased click force and an accelerated outflow at the time of our examination on the shunt system.The cause of the malfunctions can be identified as the deposits found.Deposits caused by substances naturally present in the body, such as protein, blood or tissue particles, are among the known and unavoidable risks and side effects of hydrocephalus therapy.Even small amounts of protein can compromise the integrity of the valve.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.No further regulatory actions are required from our point of view.
|