美国食品药品监督管理局(FDA)批准的骨科器械及其召回情况分析。

Analysis of FDA-Approved Orthopaedic Devices and Their Recalls.

作者信息

Day Charles S, Park David J, Rozenshteyn Frederick S, Owusu-Sarpong Nana, Gonzalez Aldebarani

机构信息

Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts

Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts Tufts University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts.

出版信息

J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2016 Mar 16;98(6):517-24. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.15.00286.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) evaluates medical devices by two main pathways. The more stringent Premarket Approval (PMA) review requires clinical trials, and the Premarket Notification 510(k) process generally exempts devices from clinical trials if they prove to be substantially equivalent to existing devices. We hypothesized that orthopaedic devices are more likely to be cleared through the 510(k) process and thus are more susceptible to being recalled.

METHODS

Using the FDA's public database, we searched for the following: PMA and 510(k) clearances for orthopaedics and non-orthopaedic specialties, including General & Plastic Surgery, Gastroenterology/Urology, Obstetrics/Gynecology, and Ear Nose & Throat, from 1992 to 2012. Additionally, we searched for all device recall events from 2002 to 2012. For the top-twenty recall companies, we calculated the odds ratio that compares the likelihood of recall for 510(k)-approved devices with that for PMA-approved devices.

RESULTS

From 1992 to 2012, the proportion of non-orthopaedic devices cleared via the 510(k) process decreased from 91% to 53%. However, that of orthopaedic devices decreased only from 94% to 88%. Furthermore, we found that from 2002 to 2012, the percentage of recalled devices was 17.8% for 510(k)-cleared devices and 1.6% for PMA-approved devices. When stratified on the basis of recall class, the odds ratios were 3.5 for class-I devices, 13.2 for class-II devices, and 8.5 for class-III devices.

CONCLUSIONS

Given that 510(k)-cleared devices were 11.5 times more likely to be recalled than PMA-approved devices, it is concerning that most orthopaedic devices are cleared through the 510(k) process with limited clinical trials data.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

When orthopaedic surgeons are considering using a new device clinically in their patients, it is important for them to consider how the new device was approved by the FDA. If the device was approved by the 510(k) pathway, then it may have been approved without additional clinical studies confirming efficacy or safety.

摘要

背景

美国食品药品监督管理局(FDA)通过两种主要途径评估医疗器械。更为严格的上市前批准(PMA)审查需要进行临床试验,而上市前通知510(k)程序通常在器械被证明与现有器械实质等同的情况下豁免其进行临床试验。我们推测骨科器械更有可能通过510(k)程序获批,因此更容易被召回。

方法

利用FDA的公共数据库,我们搜索了以下内容:1992年至2012年期间骨科及非骨科专业(包括普通外科与整形外科、胃肠病学/泌尿学、妇产科以及耳鼻喉科)的PMA和510(k)批准情况。此外,我们搜索了2002年至2012年期间所有的器械召回事件。对于召回排名前二十的公司,我们计算了510(k)批准器械与PMA批准器械的召回可能性比较的优势比。

结果

1992年至2012年期间,通过510(k)程序获批的非骨科器械比例从91%降至53%。然而,骨科器械的这一比例仅从94%降至88%。此外,我们发现2002年至2012年期间,510(k)批准器械的召回百分比为17.8%,PMA批准器械的召回百分比为1.6%。按召回类别分层时,I类器械的优势比为3.5,II类器械为13.2,III类器械为8.5。

结论

鉴于510(k)批准器械被召回的可能性是PMA批准器械的11.5倍,令人担忧的是,大多数骨科器械是通过510(k)程序获批的,临床试验数据有限。

临床意义

当骨科外科医生考虑在临床中为患者使用新器械时,对他们来说重要的是考虑该新器械是如何获得FDA批准的。如果该器械是通过510(k)途径批准的,那么它可能是在没有额外的临床研究证实其有效性或安全性的情况下被批准的。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索