Nonclinical implantation studies are a common and often critical step for medical device safety assessment in the bench-to-market pathway. Nonclinical implanted medical devices or drug-device combination products require complex macroscopic and microscopic pathology evaluations due to the physical presence of the device itself and unique tissue responses to device materials. The Medical Device Implant Site Evaluation working group of the Society of Toxicologic Pathology's (STP) Scientific and Regulatory Policy Committee (SRPC) was tasked with reviewing scientific, technical, and regulatory considerations for these studies. Implant site evaluations require highly specialized methods and analytical schemes that should be designed on a case-by-case basis to address specific study objectives. Existing STP best practice recommendations can serve as a framework when performing nonclinical studies under Good Laboratory Practices and help mitigate limitations in standards and guidances for implant evaluations (e.g., those from the International Organization for Standardization [ISO], ASTM International). This article integrates standards referenced by sponsors and regulatory bodies with practical pathology evaluation methods for implantable medical devices and combination products. The goal is to ensure the maximum accuracy and scientific relevance of pathology data acquired during a medical device or combination drug-device implantation study.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/01926233221103202 | DOI Listing |
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A
January 2025
Department of Biology and Biological Engineering, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA 91125.
Cognition relies on transforming sensory inputs into a generalizable understanding of the world. Mirror neurons have been proposed to underlie this process, mapping visual representations of others' actions and sensations onto neurons that mediate our own, providing a conduit for understanding. However, this theory has limitations.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFOtol Neurotol
February 2025
Department of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Donders Center for Neuroscience, Radboud University Medical Center, Radboud University, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Objective: To compare the 3-year outcomes of the modified minimally invasive Ponto surgery (m-MIPS) to both the original MIPS (o-MIPS) and linear incision technique with soft tissue preservation (LIT-TP) for inserting bone-anchored hearing implants (BAHIs).
Study Design: Prospective study with three patient groups: m-MIPS, o-MIPS, and LIT-TP.
Setting: Tertiary referral center.
Otol Neurotol
February 2025
Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
Objective: To analyze the use of electrical field imaging (EFI) in the detection of extracochlear electrodes in cochlear implants (CI).
Study Design: Retrospective cohort study.
Setting: Tertiary academic medical center.
Objective: The aim of this study is to test the feasibility of a custom 3D-printed guide for performing a minimally invasive cochleostomy for cochlear implantation.
Study Design: Prospective performance study.
Setting: Secondary care.
Otol Neurotol
February 2025
Department of Surgery, Section of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, University of Chicago Medicine, Chicago, Illinois.
Objective: This study aims to evaluate the potential association of perioperative hearing outcomes with frailty by Modified 5-Item Frailty Index (mFI-5).
Design: Retrospective cross-sectional study.
Setting: Single-institutional study conducted at a tertiary care hospital between January 2018 and January 2022.
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!