Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32309074›Full record

ArticlePlastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open2020

Postmarket Modifications of High-risk Plastic Surgery Devices.

Oluwatobi R Olaiya, Doyinsola Oyesile, Nicholas Stone, Lawrence Mbuagbaw, Mark H McRae

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Oluwatobi R OlaiyaMichael G. DeGroote School of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Doyinsola OyesileUniversity of Western Ontario Faculty of Health Science, London, Ontario, Canada.
Nicholas StoneDivision of Plastic Surgery, Department of Surgery, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Lawrence MbuagbawDepartment of Health Research Methods, Evidence and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Mark H McRaeUniversity of Western Ontario Faculty of Health Science, London, Ontario, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn the United States, high-risk medical devices must be cleared through the premarket approval (PMA) pathway, which requires clinical evidence ensuring safety and efficacy. Approved devices can be modified and reintroduced to market without additional study through the PMA supplemental review track. This study characterizes the changes of high-risk plastic surgery devices once they undergo initial clearance.

methodsA retrospective, cross-sectional analysis of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) PMA database. The following data were extracted from the PMA database (January 1, 1980 to December 31, 2018): initial clearance date, device type, the number and type of supplement, supplement reason, and product withdrawal date. Data from the FDA medical device recall database were also extracted and reported. The median number of device modifications and median lifetime of device-years were calculated.

resultsThere have been 39 original plastic surgery devices approved by the FDA. There was no significant change with respect to initial clearance dates for original devices over time (r = 0.28;

conclusionsOver the past 2 decades, plastic surgery device manufacturers have significantly increased the use of supplement track review. High-risk plastic surgery devices may undergo frequent minor changes without clinical evidence to support the safety and efficacy of modified versions.

Identifiers

PMID32309074
PMCPMC7159931

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.