The issue of a U.S. Food and Drug Administration moratorium on the use of the pulmonary artery catheter.

New horizons (Baltimore, Md.) Pub Date : 1997-08-01
C L Sprung, L A Eidelman
{"title":"The issue of a U.S. Food and Drug Administration moratorium on the use of the pulmonary artery catheter.","authors":"C L Sprung,&nbsp;L A Eidelman","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To review the literature addressing the issue of a U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) moratorium on use of the pulmonary artery catheter (PAC).</p><p><strong>Data source: </strong>Pertinent English language articles dealing with medical devices including the PAC were retrieved from 1976 through 1996.</p><p><strong>Study selection: </strong>Articles were chosen if issues related to medical devices were studied or reviewed.</p><p><strong>Data extraction: </strong>From the articles selected, information about the 1976 Medical Device Amendment and the PAC was obtained.</p><p><strong>Data synthesis: </strong>In 1976, the Medical Device Amendment gave the FDA power over medical devices. The pulmonary artery catheter is considered a class II device and was on the market before passage of the 1976 Act. Class II devices require general and specific controls to reasonably assure safety and effectiveness. A reasonable assurance of safety occurs when the probable benefits to health from the use of the device outweigh any probable risks. If a monitor measures an established and well-understood variable and the intended use claim is limited to the measurement of that variable, then the effectiveness consists of determining device safety and performance defined as the measurement of agreement with a recognized reference method. Deaths and serious injuries secondary to pulmonary artery catheterization are extremely rare despite more than 25 years of use. Pulmonary artery catheter manufacturer's indications for use are measurements such as hemodynamic pressures, thermodilution cardiac output, continuous cardiac output, mixed venous oxygen saturation, and blood sampling; intended uses have not included claims of clinical benefit. Evidence exists that pulmonary artery catheterization provides agreement with established measurements including pressure and cardiac output. Evidence also exists that pulmonary artery catheter derived data are unobtainable clinically, that the derived data helps in therapy changes and may lead to more appropriate therapy. The evidence demonstrates an absence of unreasonable risk of injury from pulmonary artery catheterization and provision of important clinical results. Therefore, pulmonary artery catheterization meets FDA requirements for safety and effectiveness.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>An FDA moratorium on the use of the PAC is not indicated.</p>","PeriodicalId":79357,"journal":{"name":"New horizons (Baltimore, Md.)","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1997-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"New horizons (Baltimore, Md.)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To review the literature addressing the issue of a U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) moratorium on use of the pulmonary artery catheter (PAC).

Data source: Pertinent English language articles dealing with medical devices including the PAC were retrieved from 1976 through 1996.

Study selection: Articles were chosen if issues related to medical devices were studied or reviewed.

Data extraction: From the articles selected, information about the 1976 Medical Device Amendment and the PAC was obtained.

Data synthesis: In 1976, the Medical Device Amendment gave the FDA power over medical devices. The pulmonary artery catheter is considered a class II device and was on the market before passage of the 1976 Act. Class II devices require general and specific controls to reasonably assure safety and effectiveness. A reasonable assurance of safety occurs when the probable benefits to health from the use of the device outweigh any probable risks. If a monitor measures an established and well-understood variable and the intended use claim is limited to the measurement of that variable, then the effectiveness consists of determining device safety and performance defined as the measurement of agreement with a recognized reference method. Deaths and serious injuries secondary to pulmonary artery catheterization are extremely rare despite more than 25 years of use. Pulmonary artery catheter manufacturer's indications for use are measurements such as hemodynamic pressures, thermodilution cardiac output, continuous cardiac output, mixed venous oxygen saturation, and blood sampling; intended uses have not included claims of clinical benefit. Evidence exists that pulmonary artery catheterization provides agreement with established measurements including pressure and cardiac output. Evidence also exists that pulmonary artery catheter derived data are unobtainable clinically, that the derived data helps in therapy changes and may lead to more appropriate therapy. The evidence demonstrates an absence of unreasonable risk of injury from pulmonary artery catheterization and provision of important clinical results. Therefore, pulmonary artery catheterization meets FDA requirements for safety and effectiveness.

Conclusion: An FDA moratorium on the use of the PAC is not indicated.

美国食品和药物管理局暂停使用肺动脉导管的问题。
目的:回顾有关美国食品和药物管理局(FDA)暂停使用肺动脉导管(PAC)的文献。数据来源:1976年至1996年检索了涉及医疗器械(包括PAC)的相关英文文章。研究选择:如果研究或回顾了与医疗器械相关的问题,则选择文章。数据提取:从所选文章中获得1976年医疗器械修正案和PAC的信息。数据综合:1976年,医疗器械修正案赋予了FDA对医疗器械的权力。肺动脉导管被认为是II类设备,在1976年法案通过之前就已经上市了。II类器械需要一般和特定的控制,以合理地确保安全性和有效性。当使用该装置对健康的可能益处超过任何可能的风险时,就可以合理地保证安全。如果监测器测量的是一个已建立且易于理解的变量,并且预期用途声明仅限于该变量的测量,则有效性包括确定设备安全性和性能,定义为与公认参考方法的一致性测量。尽管使用肺动脉导管超过25年,但继发于肺动脉导管的死亡和严重伤害极为罕见。肺动脉导管制造商的使用适应症是测量如血流动力学压力、热稀释心输出量、连续心输出量、混合静脉氧饱和度和血液采样;预期用途不包括临床益处的声明。有证据表明,肺动脉导管插入提供了一致的既定测量,包括压力和心输出量。也有证据表明,肺动脉导管衍生数据在临床上无法获得,衍生数据有助于改变治疗方法,并可能导致更合适的治疗。证据表明肺动脉导管置入不存在不合理的损伤风险,并提供了重要的临床结果。因此,肺动脉导管置入符合FDA对安全性和有效性的要求。结论:FDA不建议暂停使用PAC。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信