Medical device recalls and the FDA approval process

Archives of Internal Medicine

Volumn 171, Issue 11, 2011, Pages 1006-1011

  Zuckerman, Diana M ^a   Brown, Paul ^a   Nissen, Steven E ^b  

^a National Research Center for Women and Families   (United States)

^b LERNER RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CONTACT LENS SOLUTION;

ANESTHESIOLOGY; ARTICLE; AUTOMATED EXTERNAL DEFIBRILLATOR; BLINDNESS; BLOOD GLUCOSE METER; CARDIOVASCULAR EQUIPMENT; CLINICAL CHEMISTRY; DEVICE APPROVAL; DEVICE RECALL; EYE INFECTION; FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION; GENERAL HOSPITAL; HAZARD; INFUSION SYSTEM; INSULIN PUMP; MARKETING; NEUROLOGY; OPHTHALMOLOGY; PARASITOSIS; PATIENT SAFETY; PRIORITY JOURNAL;

DEVICE APPROVAL; HUMANS; MEDICAL DEVICE RECALLS; RISK FACTORS; UNITED STATES; UNITED STATES FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION;

EID: 79955726540     PISSN: 00039926     EISSN: 15383679     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1001/archinternmed.2011.30     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. Lohr v Medtronic Inc, 56 F3d 1335 (11th Cir 1995). http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=9155174046926497575&q=Lohr+v.+Medtronic,+Inc.+&hl=en&as_sdt=2,9. Accessed January 13, 2011.
2. US Food and Drug Administration. Medical devices premarket approval (PMA). http://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/DeviceRegulationandGuidance/HowtoMarketYourDevice/PremarketSubmissions/PremarketApprovalPMA/default.htm. Accessed November 9, 2010.
3. Public health effectiveness of the FDA 510(k) clearance process: balancing patient safety and innovation: workshop report (2010) http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=12960&page=9. Accessed November 30, 2010.
4. US Food and Drug Administration. interactive review for medical device submissions: 510(k)s, original PMAs, PMA supplements, original BLAs, and BLA supplements. http://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/DeviceRegulationandGuidance/GuidanceDocuments/ucm085994.htm. Accessed January 13, 2011.
5. US Government Accountability Office. FDA should take steps to ensure that high-risk device types are approved through the most stringent premarket review process: GAO-09-190: January 2009. http://gao.gov/new.items/d09190.pdf. Accessed November 9, 2010.
6. US Food and Drug Administration. Device classification. http://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/DeviceRegulationandGuidance/Overview/ClassifyYourDevice/default.htm. Accessed July 24, 2009.
7. US Food and Drug Administration. Medical devices: list of device recalls. http://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/Safety/RecallsCorrectionsRemovals/ListofRecalls/default.htm. Accessed August 17, 2010.
8. US Food and Drug Administration, Center for Devices and Radiological Health. CDRH FY 2006 highlights. www.fda.gov/downloads/AboutFDA/CentersOffices/CDRH/CDRHReports/ucm129258.pdf. Accessed August 21, 2009.
9. Maisel WH. Medical devices: are current regulations doing enough for patients? testimony before the Subcommittee on Health, Committee on Energy and Commerce, House of Representatives: June 2009. http://energycommerce.house.gov/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1677. Accessed August 31, 2009.
10. US Food and Drug Administration. Medical & radiation emitting device recalls. http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfRES/res.cfm?id=52779. Accessed March 2, 2010.
11. Dhruva SS, Bero LA, Redberg RF. Strength of study evidence examined by the FDA in premarket approval of cardiovascular devices. JAMA. 2009;302(24): 2679-2685.
12. Zuckerman D. Testimony on reauthorization of the Medical Device User Fee and Modernization Act before the Subcommittee on Health, Committee on Energy and Commerce, House of Representatives: May 2007. http://archives.energycommerce.house.gov/cmte_mtgs/110-he-hrg.051607.Zuckerman-Testimony.pdf. Accessed November 9, 2010.
13. Redberg RF. Medical devices and the FDA approval process: balancing safety and innovation; comment on "prevalence of fracture and fragment embolization of bard retrievable vena cava filters and clinical implications including cardiac perforation and tamponade." Arch Intern Med. 2010;170(20):1831-1833.
14. US Food and Drug Administration. Public health effectiveness of the FDA 510(k) clearance process: balancing patient safety and innovation: workshop report, October 14, 2010. http://www.books.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=12960&page=1. Accessed January 13, 2011.
15. US Food and Drug Administration. CDRH preliminary internal evaluations- volume I: 510(k) working group, preliminary report and recommendations. August 2010. http://www.fda.gov/downloads/AboutFDA/CentersOffices/CDRH/CDRHReports/UCM220784.pdf. Accessed August 17, 2010.
16. AdvaMed. AdvaMed statement on FDA public meeting (press release). October 2010. http://www.advamed.org/MemberPortal/About/NewsRoom/NewsReleases/PR-FDA510K-10810.htr. Accessed November 9, 2010.
17. Medical Device Industry Applauds Lawmaker Concern Over Review Process. CQ Healthbeat News. October 13, 2010.
18. Federal Register. Medical device user fee rates for fiscal year 2010: Docket No. FDA-2009-N-0338: August 2009. http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2009/E9-18456.htm. Accessed June 21, 2010.
19. Federal Register. Prescription drug user fee rates for fiscal year 2010: Docket No. FDA-2009-N-0339: August 2009. http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2009/E9-18457.htm. Accessed June 18, 2010.
20. Federal Register. Prescription Drug User Fee Act; public meeting: docket No. FDA-
21. 2010-N00128: March 2010. http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=2010_register&docid=fr16mr10-68.pdf. Accessed August 18, 2010.
22. Federal Register. Medical Device User Fee Act; public meeting: Docket No. FDA-2010-N00389: August 2010. http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2010/2010-19843.htm. Accessed August 13, 2010.
23. Rosecrans HS. FDA's 510(k) workshop: issues related to postmarket surveillance and new information about marketed devices: February 2010. http://www.fda.gov/downloads/MedicalDevices/NewsEvents/WorkshopsConferences/UCM201345.pdf. Accessed March 2, 2010.
24. Tillman D-B. Understanding the premarket notification 510(k) process: FDA's 510(k) working group presentation to the Institute of Medicine: March 2010. http://www.iom.edu/~/media/Files/Activity%20Files/PublicHealth/510kProcess/2010-MAR-01/Tillman-The%20510k%20Working%20Group.ashx. Accessed November 9, 2010.
25. Medtronic Inc v Lohr, 518 US 470 (1996). http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=9764091134585266905&q=Medtronic,+Inc.+v+Lohr+et+vir&hl=en&as_sdt=2,9. Accessed January 13, 2011.
26. McCarty M. Batelle says 510(k) recalls since'98 are at less than 1%. http://www.medicaldevicedaily.com/servlet/com.accumedia.web.Dispatcher?next=bioWorldHeadlines_article&forceid=72862. Accessed November 9, 2010.