|
Investigation: visual inspection: during the investigation, no significant deformation or damage of the valve was determined.Permeability test: a permeability test has shown that the valve is blocked.Computer controlled test: to investigate the claim of under-drainage, the opening pressure is measured using a miethke computer controlled testing apparatus which simulates a cerebrospinal fluid flow.The valve is tested in both the horizontal as well as the vertical positions.Because the valve is not permeable, a computer control test is not possible.Internal inspection: after dismantling of the valve, visible deposits were found.Results: based on our investigation results, we can determine a blockage in the valve.The determined deposits can be named as the cause for the occlusion.Organic material 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 valve met all specifications of the final inspection when released from christoph miethke gmbh & co.Kg.
|
|
It was reported that a gav 2.0 (#fx215t) was implanted during a procedure performed on (b)(6) 2024.According to the complainant, the valve caused an underdrainage.The patient underwent a revision procedure.The complainant device was returned to the manufacturer for evaluation.No patient complications were reported as a result of the revision procedure.Age: 7 years, 11 months.
|