PubMed Health⌕ Search

SEARCH · PubMed Health

Results for “Device Approval”

Explore indexed PubMed citations for clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health research. Read source abstracts and follow each citation to its original PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 541 records · Page 30Linked to original sources
PubMedDate not supplied

Device-related litigation & clinical engineering.

The investigation of patient-related incidents often must include consideration of the role of the associated medical devices. In addition to being good practice from quality review perspectives, federally mandated MDR requirements generally need to include clinical engineering input. Medical devices also play a significant role in patient litigation aimed at medical providers, hospitals and device manufacturers. Clinical engineering has an important role to play in supporting and tracking litigation as it relates to medical equipment. This role requires an understanding of the litigation process and active participation as a claim progresses. It also should include careful evaluation of the assertions and defenses raised by the various parties both during and at the conclusion of litigation.

Biomedical Engineering↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Safely re-integrating silicone breast implants into the plastic surgery practice.

In the early 1990s, it was reported that silicone breast implants were possibly responsible for serious damage to women's health. In January 1992, the Food and Drug Administration issued a voluntary breast implant moratorium and, in April, issued a ban on the use of silicone gel-filled implants for cosmetic breast augmentation. Since that time, silicone gel-filled breast implants have been available to women only for select cases: women seeking breast reconstruction or revision of an existing breast implant, women who have had breast cancer surgery, a severe injury to the breast, a birth defect that affects the breast, or a medical condition causing a severe breast deformity. Since the ban on the use of silicone gel-filled breast implants for cosmetic breast augmentation, numerous scientific studies have been conducted. To ensure patient safety, the American Board of Plastic Surgery believes that these scientific studies and the Food and Drug Administration's scrutiny of silicone gel-filled breast implants have been appropriate and necessary.

Breast Implantation↗
PubMed1996

Development of alternative breast implant filler material: criteria and horizons.

The introduction of the silicone gel-filled breast implant more than 30 years ago changed the nature of alloplastic breast augmentation and reconstruction. Over the last three decades, it is estimated that one million American women have undergone implantation with some variation of these devices. Recent medical, legal, and regulatory developments have forced a moratorium on the unrestricted uses of the silicone gel-filled implants, and it appears unlikely that its general use will return. However, there is a continued need for some type of breast implant in both aesthetic and reconstructive surgery. The Food and Drug Administration has proposed testing guidelines for the development of any new breast implant before unrestricted clinical use. These guidelines will direct the creation of new filler materials from their earliest stages, through long-term postimplantation follow-up studies. This article succinctly examines the central issues in the breast implant controversy in relation to the FDA's recommendations for the development of new implants, discusses breast implant filler materials currently under development, and offers guidelines fro the development of breast implant fillers that are safe and effective.

Breast Implants↗
PubMed2002

Ten years ago.

Explore the source record for details and available documents.

Breast Implants↗
PubMed1995

The effect of pedicle screw/plate fixation on lumbar/lumbosacral autogenous bone graft fusions in patients with degenerative disc disease.

STUDY DESIGN: A prospective, multi-center Investigational Device Exemption Study was carried out in the United States using a pedicle screw and plate system to perform a fusion in patients with degenerative disc disease or spondylolisthesis. The patients' pain function, complications, and fusion status were evaluated and compared with literature controls. OBJECTIVES: To study the safety and efficacy of the ISF pedicle screw/plate system. This article focuses only on those study patients with degenerative disc disease treated with autogenous bone grafts and compares the results to those of similar patients treated without instrumentation, as reported in the literature. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Twenty-eight patients were in the subgroup studied--patients with degenerative disc disease who had fusions with autogenous bone graft. This study was conducted at four clinical sites with a 2-year follow-up. Patient follow-up was greater than 95% at all time points. METHODS: To be considered a patient with degenerative disc disease, radiographs had to demonstrate a collapse of the disc, the presence of bone erosion, or the compression of the vertebrae as the primary spinal abnormality. Spinal fusion must have been the recommended surgical treatment for discogenic pain. The fusion status was evaluated by the operating surgeon and an independent reviewer. RESULTS: After 2 years, this subset of patients (n = 28) with degenerative disc disease who had lumbar/lumbosacral fusion with autogenous bone graft was found to have a pseudarthrosis rate of 0%. Eight articles in the literature were found to be valid noninstrumented literature controls with which this subgroup could be compared. The average pseudarthrosis rate in the control group was 32%. CONCLUSIONS: A statistical analysis showed that patients with degenerative disc disease who underwent fusion without pedicle screw instrumentation were over 24 times more likely to have a pseudarthrosis than comparable patients implanted with a pedicle screw/plate system. Regarding the most important goal in performing a spinal fusion--fusion of the spine--the pedicle screw/plate system used in this study was shown to be a safe and efficacious method of facilitating fusion with autogenous bone graft for this patient population.

Adult↗
PubMed2001

A multicenter, prospective, randomized trial evaluating a new hemostatic agent for spinal surgery.

STUDY DESIGN: A prospective, randomized trial comparing Proceed, a gelatin-based hemostatic sealant (treatment), with Gelfoam-thrombin (control) in stopping intraoperative bleeding during spinal surgery. OBJECTIVES: To determine the effectiveness and safety of Proceed. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Proceed has been tested in animal models to determine its safety and effectiveness as a hemostatic agent. The current study was conducted under a Food and Drug Administration-approved Investigational Device Exemption to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of Proceed in humans. METHODS: For this study, 127 patients undergoing spinal surgery were randomized into either the treatment or control group after standard surgical means to control bleeding had failed. The bleeding site was evaluated at 1, 2, 3, 6, and 10 minutes after the hemostatic agent was applied. The application was considered successful if the bleeding stopped within 10 minutes. Follow-up evaluation was performed at 12 to 36 hours, then at 6 to 8 weeks after surgery. RESULTS: Proceed stopped bleeding in 98% of the patients (first bleeding site only) within 10 minutes, as compared with 90% of the control patients (P = 0.001). At 3 minutes, successful hemostasis had been achieved in 97% of the Proceed group, as compared with 71% of the control group (P = 0.0001). There was no difference in the adverse event profile between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: A significantly larger number of bleeding sites had achieved hemostasis with Proceed than with Gelfoam-thrombin at 1, 2, and 3 minutes after application. Proceed was as safe as Gelfoam-thrombin when used for hemostasis during spinal surgery procedures.

Administration, Topical↗
PubMed2004

Drug-eluting stents: caution and concerns for long-term outcome.

Recent publications on drug-eluting stents (DES) report a significant reduction in restenosis rates as compared to bare metal stents in patients mostly with single vessel disease. We have recently observed however, late stent thrombosis following CYPHER DES implantation. The patient developed a hypersensitivity reaction around stent struts limited to the polymer with aneurysmal dilatation and extensive inflammation of the arterial wall in the absence of vascular healing. This incidence promotes a cautionary view and perhaps supports the use of DES only in high-risk patients.

Animals↗
PubMed2002

Pulmonary artery catheter.

Controversy concerning the pulmonary artery catheter (PAC) and its use as a bedside clinical tool continues to be a significant bone of contention. In the pursuit of evidence-based medicine, a substantial effort has been made over the last 25 years to demonstrate the benefit or lack thereof of PAC-led therapy, and this endeavor still persists with large, randomized, clinical trials currently in progress both in the United States and in the United Kingdom. This article reviews the core evidence for and against PAC efficacy and safety and considers the most appropriate method for validation of such a device.

Catheterization, Swan-Ganz↗
PubMed2001

Task Force I: methodological aspects of blood pressure measurement.

OBJECTIVE: To reach a consensus on important methodological aspects of blood pressure measurement. METHODS: A Task Force on the methodological aspects of blood pressure measurement wrote this review after the Eighth International Consensus Conference on Blood Pressure Monitoring, in Sendai, Japan (28-31 October 2001). This consensus paper is based on the papers presented by Task Force I and on the discussion sessions, and is therefore representative of a broad spectrum of expert opinion. POINTS OF CONSENSUS: Consensus was reached on the following five issues: (1) there is an urgent need for a simplified protocol for the validation of blood pressure measuring devices; (2) there is a need for a means of updating the "state of the market" for validated devices so that users can have easy access to this information; (3) new devices must be validated independently, and existing devices that have not been validated must be reappraised; (4) manufacturers should confirm when new models use algorithms which have been validated previously; (5) the Food and Drug Administration now accepts that when ambulatory blood pressure measurement is used in clinical short-term trials in which side-effects are not being assessed, a placebo arm is not required.

Algorithms↗