Yijun Ren, Lotje A Hoogervorst, Enrico G Caiani, Perla J Marang-van de Mheen, James A Smith, Alan G Fraser, Rob G H H Nelissen, Anne Lübbeke
{"title":"随机选择髋关节和膝关节假体时,来自科学报告、制造商、登记册和其他来源的安全信号频率。","authors":"Yijun Ren, Lotje A Hoogervorst, Enrico G Caiani, Perla J Marang-van de Mheen, James A Smith, Alan G Fraser, Rob G H H Nelissen, Anne Lübbeke","doi":"10.2340/17453674.2025.44035","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and purpose: </strong> The safety and performance of hip and knee prostheses can be assessed by analyzing peer-reviewed literature, registry reports, and safety notices published by national competent authorities/regulatory agencies, or manufacturers. The percentage of hip and knee prostheses with a safety signal published through any of these data sources is unknown. We aimed to assess the frequency of signals identified for a random sample of 10 hip stems, 10 hip cups, and 10 knee implants.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong> 3 literature libraries were searched to find safety signals defined as information on patterns/occurrences that may alter the device's benefit-risk profile, reported in peer-reviewed publications for the randomly selected implants. Annual registry reports from 5 national registries were examined to check whether any of the selected implants had outlier performance. The CORE-MD post-market surveillance (PMS) tool was used to collect all related safety notices from 13 competent authority/regulatory agency websites. Manufacturers' websites were screened for any reported safety information.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong> Safety signals were identified for 21 of the 30 randomly selected implants: 18 identified by registries, 7 by the CORE-MD PMS tool, and 8 based on literature, with 10 implants identified by multiple sources. There was no systematic pattern in timing of publication with a particular source publishing safety signals earlier than other sources.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong> 70% of the randomly selected hip and knee prostheses had ≥ 1 safety signals published, with registries as the source for the majority. No single source identified all 21 implants with signals, which highlights the need for a comprehensive surveillance strategy to aggregate safety signals from multiple sources.</p>","PeriodicalId":6916,"journal":{"name":"Acta Orthopaedica","volume":"96 ","pages":"460-466"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12188684/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Frequency of safety signals from scientific reports, manufactures, registers, and other sources for a random selection of hip and knee prostheses.\",\"authors\":\"Yijun Ren, Lotje A Hoogervorst, Enrico G Caiani, Perla J Marang-van de Mheen, James A Smith, Alan G Fraser, Rob G H H Nelissen, Anne Lübbeke\",\"doi\":\"10.2340/17453674.2025.44035\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background and purpose: </strong> The safety and performance of hip and knee prostheses can be assessed by analyzing peer-reviewed literature, registry reports, and safety notices published by national competent authorities/regulatory agencies, or manufacturers. The percentage of hip and knee prostheses with a safety signal published through any of these data sources is unknown. We aimed to assess the frequency of signals identified for a random sample of 10 hip stems, 10 hip cups, and 10 knee implants.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong> 3 literature libraries were searched to find safety signals defined as information on patterns/occurrences that may alter the device's benefit-risk profile, reported in peer-reviewed publications for the randomly selected implants. Annual registry reports from 5 national registries were examined to check whether any of the selected implants had outlier performance. The CORE-MD post-market surveillance (PMS) tool was used to collect all related safety notices from 13 competent authority/regulatory agency websites. Manufacturers' websites were screened for any reported safety information.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong> Safety signals were identified for 21 of the 30 randomly selected implants: 18 identified by registries, 7 by the CORE-MD PMS tool, and 8 based on literature, with 10 implants identified by multiple sources. There was no systematic pattern in timing of publication with a particular source publishing safety signals earlier than other sources.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong> 70% of the randomly selected hip and knee prostheses had ≥ 1 safety signals published, with registries as the source for the majority. No single source identified all 21 implants with signals, which highlights the need for a comprehensive surveillance strategy to aggregate safety signals from multiple sources.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":6916,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Acta Orthopaedica\",\"volume\":\"96 \",\"pages\":\"460-466\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12188684/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Acta Orthopaedica\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2340/17453674.2025.44035\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ORTHOPEDICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta Orthopaedica","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2340/17453674.2025.44035","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Frequency of safety signals from scientific reports, manufactures, registers, and other sources for a random selection of hip and knee prostheses.
Background and purpose: The safety and performance of hip and knee prostheses can be assessed by analyzing peer-reviewed literature, registry reports, and safety notices published by national competent authorities/regulatory agencies, or manufacturers. The percentage of hip and knee prostheses with a safety signal published through any of these data sources is unknown. We aimed to assess the frequency of signals identified for a random sample of 10 hip stems, 10 hip cups, and 10 knee implants.
Methods: 3 literature libraries were searched to find safety signals defined as information on patterns/occurrences that may alter the device's benefit-risk profile, reported in peer-reviewed publications for the randomly selected implants. Annual registry reports from 5 national registries were examined to check whether any of the selected implants had outlier performance. The CORE-MD post-market surveillance (PMS) tool was used to collect all related safety notices from 13 competent authority/regulatory agency websites. Manufacturers' websites were screened for any reported safety information.
Results: Safety signals were identified for 21 of the 30 randomly selected implants: 18 identified by registries, 7 by the CORE-MD PMS tool, and 8 based on literature, with 10 implants identified by multiple sources. There was no systematic pattern in timing of publication with a particular source publishing safety signals earlier than other sources.
Conclusion: 70% of the randomly selected hip and knee prostheses had ≥ 1 safety signals published, with registries as the source for the majority. No single source identified all 21 implants with signals, which highlights the need for a comprehensive surveillance strategy to aggregate safety signals from multiple sources.
期刊介绍:
Acta Orthopaedica (previously Acta Orthopaedica Scandinavica) presents original articles of basic research interest, as well as clinical studies in the field of orthopedics and related sub disciplines. Ever since the journal was founded in 1930, by a group of Scandinavian orthopedic surgeons, the journal has been published for an international audience. Acta Orthopaedica is owned by the Nordic Orthopaedic Federation and is the official publication of this federation.