|
Visual inspection: during the investigation, no significant deformations or damage of the valve were determined.Permeability test: a permeability test has shown that the progav 2.0 is permeable while the shuntassistant 2.0 has a blockage.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.The results show that the progav 2.0 does not operate within the accepted tolerance in the horizontal position.The shuntassistant 2.0 is occluded.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 breaking 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.Results: based on the investigation results, accelerated outflow and non-adjustability of the progav 2.0 were identified.The deposits visible in the valve have led to functional impairment.Furthermore, a blockage of the shuntassistant 2.0 was identified.The deposits inside have led to occlusion.Deposits caused by substances naturally present in the 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 deposits can compromise the integrity of the valve.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.
|