|
Investigation: visual inspection: bloody deposits on the product.Deposits in the control reservoir.Permeability test: a permeability test has indicated that the gav 2.0 valve has a blockage and that the control reservoir is 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 are tested in both the horizontal as well as the vertical positions.Because the gav 2.0 valve is not permeable, a computer- controlled test is not applicable.Internal inspection: after dismantling of the valve, deposits were found in gav 2.0.Results: it should be noted that the product was received dry (i.E.Not submersed in liquid as recommended).The investigation of dry items is not significant due to the affect dry deposits of liquor and blood can have on product performance.In spite of this, we have investigated the valve to the best of our abilities.For the sake of thoroughness and transparency, we would like to point out that a permeability test was/were already carried out after the revision at the hospital.Existing deposits in the csf can temporarily impair the function of the valves and is described as concomitant symptoms in hydrocephalus therapy.Based on our investigation, we confirm the presence of occlusion in the system at the time of investigation.This is likely due to the deposits observed inside the valves.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 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.
|