|
Visual inspection: during the investigation, we found bloody residues on the returned product, but no visible defects permeability test: a permeability test has shown that the progav 2.0 has a blockage while the shuntassistant 2.0 is permeable.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 valves are tested in both the horizontal as well as the vertical positions.Because the progav 2.0 is not permeable, a computer controlled test is not possible.The shuntassistant 2.0 operates within the specified tolerances in the all positions.Adjustment test: the progav 2.0 was tested and is adjustable to all specified pressures.Braking force and brake function test: the brake functionality test has shown that the brake function operates as expected and the braking force is within the given tolerances.Internal inspection: after dismantling of the valves, bloody, dried residues were found in both valves.Results: in advance, we would like to point out that the product sent in was not inserted in liquid at the time of delivery.Dried deposits can influence the function of the products, which can affect the results.Despite this, we have examined the valve.Based on our investigation results, we can determine a clogging of the progav 2.0 and the pediatric prechamber.The visible bloody deposits in both components caused the blockage.Deposits caused by substances naturally present in the patient's body, such as organic matter, 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.In regards to the shuntassistant 2.0, we cannot determine functional deviations or other abnormalities in the product.The examination of the return has been completed with the drafting of this report.No further regulatory actions are required from our point of view.
|