|
It was reported that the drainage was not smooth.It was stated "after the operation, the line was not loosened during the operation, but the water was leaking on the wound." it was suspected that the reservoir was blocked and leaked.The patient's status at the time of the report was alive-no injury.
|
|
The returned valve was patent.The valve met the requirements for leak testing.However, it did not meet the requirements for reflux, pressure-flow and preimplantation testing.There was proteinaceous debris noted in the interior and exterior of the device.Debris within the valve may hold pressure-flow controlling mechanisms open resulting in fluid reflux and affecting the flow of fluid through the valve and fluid reflux.The instructions for use (ifu) that accompany the device caution that ¿shunt obstruction may occur in any of the components of the shunt system.The system may become occluded internally due to tissue fragments, blood clots, tumor cell aggregates, bacterial colonization, or other debris.¿ the valve also did not meet the requirements for leak testing due to multiple tears observed in the top of the reservoir.It is unknown how or when this damage occurred.The ifu caution that ¿care should be taken in handling the valves as silicone has a low cut and tear resistance.¿ the ifu also caution that ¿improper use of instruments in the handling or implantation of shunt products may result in the cutting, slitting, crushing or breaking of components.¿ approximately 47.5 cm of the ventricular catheter was returned.The catheter was patent and met the requirements for leak testing.Approximately 51 cm of the peritoneal catheter was returned.The catheter was patent and met the requirements for leak testing.All valves are 100% tested at the time of manufacture.All catheters are 100% inspected at the time of manufacture.If information is provided in the future, a supplemental report will be issued.
|