{"title":"An Analysis of the Food and Drug Administration Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience Database for MAGnetic Expansion Control Spinal Rods.","authors":"Jack Filan, Andrew Bowey, Thomas Joyce","doi":"10.1007/s43441-024-00724-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>MAGnetic Expansion Control (MAGEC) rods can prevent repeated lengthening operations for scoliosis patients. However, there have been several Field Safety Notices issued, including a worldwide product recall due to actuator endcap separation. We aimed to review adverse events reported to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regarding MAGEC rods, focusing on MAGEC X.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Reports submitted to the Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience database in relation to MAGEC devices were accessed and analysed using R Statistical Software. Exclusion criteria included duplicate and literature review reports (n = 54). Free-text data were analysed using inductive content analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>1016 adverse events were reported to 11/30/2023. 99.0% (1006) were submitted by the manufacturer. Reports primarily arose from the UK (465, 45.8%) or US (421, 41.4%). From free-text data the most frequent adverse events were distraction mechanism failure (573), device wear (272), and actuator seal damage (180). Rod fracture (n = 48) was not significantly associated with rod diameter (≤ 5.0 mm or > 5.0 mm), p = 0.736. 234 reports referenced MAGEC X devices; actuator endcap separation was identified in 41.9% (99). Other events include failure of distraction (63), surface damage (31), and rod fracture (15). On 06/30/2020 MAGEC X2 received FDA approval. Twenty reports reference devices manufactured after this date, seven describe distraction mechanism failure; notably there are no reports of endcap separation.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>These data represent the largest series of adverse events reported for MAGEC rods, including significant new data regarding MAGEC X. As well as endcap separation, failure of distraction, surface damage, and rod fracture were reported.</p>","PeriodicalId":23084,"journal":{"name":"Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s43441-024-00724-4","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"MEDICAL INFORMATICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: MAGnetic Expansion Control (MAGEC) rods can prevent repeated lengthening operations for scoliosis patients. However, there have been several Field Safety Notices issued, including a worldwide product recall due to actuator endcap separation. We aimed to review adverse events reported to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regarding MAGEC rods, focusing on MAGEC X.
Methods: Reports submitted to the Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience database in relation to MAGEC devices were accessed and analysed using R Statistical Software. Exclusion criteria included duplicate and literature review reports (n = 54). Free-text data were analysed using inductive content analysis.
Results: 1016 adverse events were reported to 11/30/2023. 99.0% (1006) were submitted by the manufacturer. Reports primarily arose from the UK (465, 45.8%) or US (421, 41.4%). From free-text data the most frequent adverse events were distraction mechanism failure (573), device wear (272), and actuator seal damage (180). Rod fracture (n = 48) was not significantly associated with rod diameter (≤ 5.0 mm or > 5.0 mm), p = 0.736. 234 reports referenced MAGEC X devices; actuator endcap separation was identified in 41.9% (99). Other events include failure of distraction (63), surface damage (31), and rod fracture (15). On 06/30/2020 MAGEC X2 received FDA approval. Twenty reports reference devices manufactured after this date, seven describe distraction mechanism failure; notably there are no reports of endcap separation.
Conclusion: These data represent the largest series of adverse events reported for MAGEC rods, including significant new data regarding MAGEC X. As well as endcap separation, failure of distraction, surface damage, and rod fracture were reported.
期刊介绍:
Therapeutic Innovation & Regulatory Science (TIRS) is the official scientific journal of DIA that strives to advance medical product discovery, development, regulation, and use through the publication of peer-reviewed original and review articles, commentaries, and letters to the editor across the spectrum of converting biomedical science into practical solutions to advance human health.
The focus areas of the journal are as follows:
Biostatistics
Clinical Trials
Product Development and Innovation
Global Perspectives
Policy
Regulatory Science
Product Safety
Special Populations