|
Visual inspection in the first step of our investigation, we performed a visual inspection of the product.We have checked for possible damage, deformation of the housing, deposits or other abnormalities.The following observations were made during the visual inspection: -bloody signs in the kink protection -no defects permeability test: the permeability test was performed at a hydrostatic pressure difference of the pressure setting of the progav 2.0 shunt system upon receipt plus 30 cmh2o in the horizontal direction of flow.The test showed that the progav 2.0 shunt system is non-permeable.To determine the location of the occlusion, the shunt system was dismantled and each element was tested individually for permeability.The test showed that all parts for itself are permeable.During the test of the peritoneal catheter, a lot of air bubbles leaked out of the catheter.This might be the reason for the initial assessment of non-permeability.Computer control test: to check the flow rate of the valves, the valves were tested on a miethke computer controlled testing apparatus and passed the standard test.The flow of the test liquid was reduced step by step from 60 ml/h to 5 ml/h (in accordance with iso 7197).Distilled water was used as the test-liquid.The resulting pressure was measured.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 10.67 cmh2o.This is within the specified tolerance of 9 cmh2o ± 3 cmh2o.Additionally, the shuntassistant 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 shuntassistant had a pressure of 7.67 cmh2o.This is not within the specified tolerance of 10 cmh2o +4/-2 cmh2o.An accelerated outflow could be determined.Adjustability test: in this step, it was investigated whether the adjustable progav 2.0 can be successfully set to each specified pressure setting.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 shuntassistant is a fixed pressure valve, therefore the adjustability test is inapplicable.Braking force and brake function test: the braking force and brake function test investigates whether the brake function of the adjustable valves is present and how much force must be exerted on the housing to release the rotor to adjust the valves using the integrated magnet of a specific measurement apparatus of braking force.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 are finally opened with a special tool.After dismantling of the valves, no visible deposits were found in both valves.For more detailed visibility of possible proteins/deposits in the valves, they were inserted in a colouring solution.[colouring solution consisting of coomassi brilliant blue r mixed with 0.6% ethanol and distilled water].After colouring, some deposits were visible in the outlet of the shuntassistant.Results: for the sake of thoroughness and transparency, we would like to point out that an adjustment test and permeability test were already carried out after the revision at the hospital.Based on our investigation results, we have determined an initial blockage in the shunt system at the time of our investigation.After dismantling of the parts, every part for itself was permeable.The initial blockage may be caused by the air bubbles leaking from the peritoneal catheter.A preoperative test with nacl is advised in order to implant a safe product.Additionally, we have detected an accelerated outflow in the shuntassistant at the time of our investigation.The detected deposits in the shuntassistant could be named as the cause of the malfunction.Existing deposits in the csf can temporarily impair the function of the valves and is described as concomitant symptoms 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.Further actions: from our point of view, no further regulatory actions are required.
|