使用MADIT II标准用于植入式心律转复除颤器-食品和药物管理局批准的作用是什么?

Helen S Barold
{"title":"使用MADIT II标准用于植入式心律转复除颤器-食品和药物管理局批准的作用是什么?","authors":"Helen S Barold","doi":"10.1023/B:CEPR.0000023166.65777.6f","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The results of the MADIT II study have generated a great deal of controversy in the world of electrophysiology. Much of the controversy appears related to the sheer numbers of potential Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator (ICD) implants and their potential cost to the healthcare system. Two federal regulatory agencies, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) have been highly visible in discussions. The FDA approved the MADIT II indications for Guidant ICDs, while CMS covered a limited subset of the patients studied. This review explores some the issues surrounding the trial and the key participants in this discussion with emphasis on the role of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and how regulatory decisions may impact on clinical practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":80888,"journal":{"name":"Cardiac electrophysiology review","volume":"7 4","pages":"443-6"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2003-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1023/B:CEPR.0000023166.65777.6f","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Using the MADIT II criteria for implantable cardioverter defibrillators-what is the role of the Food and Drug Administration approval?\",\"authors\":\"Helen S Barold\",\"doi\":\"10.1023/B:CEPR.0000023166.65777.6f\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The results of the MADIT II study have generated a great deal of controversy in the world of electrophysiology. Much of the controversy appears related to the sheer numbers of potential Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator (ICD) implants and their potential cost to the healthcare system. Two federal regulatory agencies, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) have been highly visible in discussions. The FDA approved the MADIT II indications for Guidant ICDs, while CMS covered a limited subset of the patients studied. This review explores some the issues surrounding the trial and the key participants in this discussion with emphasis on the role of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and how regulatory decisions may impact on clinical practice.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":80888,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Cardiac electrophysiology review\",\"volume\":\"7 4\",\"pages\":\"443-6\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2003-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1023/B:CEPR.0000023166.65777.6f\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Cardiac electrophysiology review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1023/B:CEPR.0000023166.65777.6f\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cardiac electrophysiology review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1023/B:CEPR.0000023166.65777.6f","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

MADIT II的研究结果在电生理学界引起了很大的争议。许多争议似乎与潜在的植入式心律转复除颤器(ICD)植入物的数量及其对医疗保健系统的潜在成本有关。两个联邦监管机构,食品和药物管理局(FDA)和医疗保险和医疗补助服务中心(CMS)在讨论中非常引人注目。FDA批准了Guidant icd的MADIT II适应症,而CMS覆盖了有限的研究患者子集。这篇综述探讨了围绕试验的一些问题和讨论的关键参与者,重点是食品和药物管理局(FDA)的作用以及监管决定如何影响临床实践。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Using the MADIT II criteria for implantable cardioverter defibrillators-what is the role of the Food and Drug Administration approval?

The results of the MADIT II study have generated a great deal of controversy in the world of electrophysiology. Much of the controversy appears related to the sheer numbers of potential Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator (ICD) implants and their potential cost to the healthcare system. Two federal regulatory agencies, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) have been highly visible in discussions. The FDA approved the MADIT II indications for Guidant ICDs, while CMS covered a limited subset of the patients studied. This review explores some the issues surrounding the trial and the key participants in this discussion with emphasis on the role of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and how regulatory decisions may impact on clinical practice.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信