|
Visual inspection: during the investigation, scratches on the outer housing of the valve, but no significant deformation or damage was determined.Permeability test: a permeability test has shown that the progav 2.0 is permeable while the shuntassistant has a blockage.Computer controlled test: to investigate the claim of over-drainage, the opening pressure is measured using a miethke computer controlled testing apparatus which simulates a cerebrospinal fluid flow.The progav 2.0 valve is tested in the horizontal position.The results show that the progav 2.0 does not operate within the accepted tolerance in the horizontal position.Shuntassistant is not permeable, a computer control test is not applicable.An accelerated outflow of progav 2.0 could be determined.Adjustment test: the progav 2.0 was tested and is not adjustable.Braking force and brake function test: the brake functionality test has shown that the brake function operates as expected.However, the braking force cannot be measured due to the non-adjustability of the valve.Internal inspection : after dismantling of the valves, deposits were found in both valves.Summary of the investigation results: based on our investigation results, an accelerated outflow and a non-adaptability at the progav 2.0 valve were determined.The shuntassistant was found to be clogged.The visible deposits in the valves caused the functional deviations.Deposits caused by substances naturally present in the patient's 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 organic material can affect the integrity of the valve.
|