Cargando…

A case study: Re-evaluating the biological risk following a processing aid change on a marketed cardiovascular implant device

Per ISO 10993-1:2018, a processing change to a medical device requires re-evaluation of biological risk. Here, we present the biological evaluation of a marketed cardiovascular implant following a detergent formulation change. This change was initially assessed through a qualitative toxicological ri...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hsia, Frances K., Stornetta, Alessia, Soucy, Nicole V.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9742234/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36518990
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fmedt.2022.1006984
_version_ 1784848480647249920
author Hsia, Frances K.
Stornetta, Alessia
Soucy, Nicole V.
author_facet Hsia, Frances K.
Stornetta, Alessia
Soucy, Nicole V.
author_sort Hsia, Frances K.
collection PubMed
description Per ISO 10993-1:2018, a processing change to a medical device requires re-evaluation of biological risk. Here, we present the biological evaluation of a marketed cardiovascular implant following a detergent formulation change. This change was initially assessed through a qualitative toxicological risk assessment based on the fully disclosed detergent formulation and a limited panel of biological testing. The conclusion was that the new detergent did not impact the biological safety of the device. This assessment was rejected during regulatory review, and extractables and leachables under exhaustive extraction conditions were then evaluated for devices processed with new versus original detergent. New extractables were present at low levels (2–65 µg/device), and a toxicological risk assessment concluded no concern. The regulatory agency responded requesting additional biological testing to evaluate local effects, further characterization of compounds with a “tentative” identification, and leachable data to support clinically relevant exposure estimates. All additional data was collected per the agency request. Still, the conclusion, considering all data, was unchanged, suggesting the extensive chemical characterization and repeat biological testing unnecessary, especially considering animal use. This case study highlights the recent shift in regulatory expectations around chemical characterization and questions the value of additional biological testing when faced with low extractable levels of low toxicity concern. It also demonstrates the need to hold to key portions of the ISO 10993 risk management framework to avoid excessive burden on medical device development when there is little to no determined risk to patient safety.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9742234
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-97422342022-12-13 A case study: Re-evaluating the biological risk following a processing aid change on a marketed cardiovascular implant device Hsia, Frances K. Stornetta, Alessia Soucy, Nicole V. Front Med Technol Medical Technology Per ISO 10993-1:2018, a processing change to a medical device requires re-evaluation of biological risk. Here, we present the biological evaluation of a marketed cardiovascular implant following a detergent formulation change. This change was initially assessed through a qualitative toxicological risk assessment based on the fully disclosed detergent formulation and a limited panel of biological testing. The conclusion was that the new detergent did not impact the biological safety of the device. This assessment was rejected during regulatory review, and extractables and leachables under exhaustive extraction conditions were then evaluated for devices processed with new versus original detergent. New extractables were present at low levels (2–65 µg/device), and a toxicological risk assessment concluded no concern. The regulatory agency responded requesting additional biological testing to evaluate local effects, further characterization of compounds with a “tentative” identification, and leachable data to support clinically relevant exposure estimates. All additional data was collected per the agency request. Still, the conclusion, considering all data, was unchanged, suggesting the extensive chemical characterization and repeat biological testing unnecessary, especially considering animal use. This case study highlights the recent shift in regulatory expectations around chemical characterization and questions the value of additional biological testing when faced with low extractable levels of low toxicity concern. It also demonstrates the need to hold to key portions of the ISO 10993 risk management framework to avoid excessive burden on medical device development when there is little to no determined risk to patient safety. Frontiers Media S.A. 2022-11-28 /pmc/articles/PMC9742234/ /pubmed/36518990 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fmedt.2022.1006984 Text en © 2022 Hsia, Stornetta and Soucy. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY) (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Medical Technology
Hsia, Frances K.
Stornetta, Alessia
Soucy, Nicole V.
A case study: Re-evaluating the biological risk following a processing aid change on a marketed cardiovascular implant device
title A case study: Re-evaluating the biological risk following a processing aid change on a marketed cardiovascular implant device
title_full A case study: Re-evaluating the biological risk following a processing aid change on a marketed cardiovascular implant device
title_fullStr A case study: Re-evaluating the biological risk following a processing aid change on a marketed cardiovascular implant device
title_full_unstemmed A case study: Re-evaluating the biological risk following a processing aid change on a marketed cardiovascular implant device
title_short A case study: Re-evaluating the biological risk following a processing aid change on a marketed cardiovascular implant device
title_sort case study: re-evaluating the biological risk following a processing aid change on a marketed cardiovascular implant device
topic Medical Technology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9742234/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36518990
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fmedt.2022.1006984
work_keys_str_mv AT hsiafrancesk acasestudyreevaluatingthebiologicalriskfollowingaprocessingaidchangeonamarketedcardiovascularimplantdevice
AT stornettaalessia acasestudyreevaluatingthebiologicalriskfollowingaprocessingaidchangeonamarketedcardiovascularimplantdevice
AT soucynicolev acasestudyreevaluatingthebiologicalriskfollowingaprocessingaidchangeonamarketedcardiovascularimplantdevice
AT hsiafrancesk casestudyreevaluatingthebiologicalriskfollowingaprocessingaidchangeonamarketedcardiovascularimplantdevice
AT stornettaalessia casestudyreevaluatingthebiologicalriskfollowingaprocessingaidchangeonamarketedcardiovascularimplantdevice
AT soucynicolev casestudyreevaluatingthebiologicalriskfollowingaprocessingaidchangeonamarketedcardiovascularimplantdevice