Major FDA medical device recalls in ophthalmology from 2003 to 2015
| Autor: | Ankur S. Gupta, Comeron W. Ghobadi, Shuai Xu, Rushi K. Talati |
|---|---|
| Rok vydání: | 2018 |
| Předmět: |
Medical Device Recalls
medicine.medical_specialty Medical device Databases Factual MEDLINE Context (language use) Food and drug administration 03 medical and health sciences 0302 clinical medicine Risk Factors Ophthalmology medicine Humans 030212 general & internal medicine Million Units Retrospective Studies Equipment Safety United States Food and Drug Administration business.industry Retrospective cohort study General Medicine Entry (data) United States Radiological weapon 030221 ophthalmology & optometry business |
| Zdroj: | Canadian Journal of Ophthalmology. 53:98-103 |
| ISSN: | 0008-4182 |
| Popis: | Objective To assess recent high-risk ophthalmic medical device recalls. Methods The publicly available Food and Drug Administration Center for Devices and Radiological Health database was mined for Class I (high-risk) ophthalmic device recalls from January 1, 2003 to December 31, 2015. The number of Class I ophthalmic device recalls was quantified. Additionally, recall characteristics and market entry data were determined for each device. Results Twelve Class I ophthalmic device recall events were identified, collectively affecting over 68 million units in distribution. A median of 147,491 units (range 20 to 57,252,581) were recalled per event. 9 out of 12 recalls (75%) had at least one documented occurrence of an adverse event to a patient. Pre-market related issues accounted for one device recall (8%), post-market related issues accounted for nine device recalls (75%), and two device recalls (17%) were indeterminate. 510(k) clearance was the most common pathway to market, accounting for 50% of Class I recalls. Three devices were approved through pre-market approval (PMA) pathway, two devices were exempt from review, and one device failed to register with the FDA. Conclusion Class I recalls surrounding ophthalmology are relatively infrequent compared to other medical specialties. However, given the impact of Class I recalls in the field, ophthalmologists have an impetus to advocate for stronger device regulation particularly in the context of post-marketing surveillance. |
| Databáze: | OpenAIRE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|
Full Text from ScienceDirect