Biomaterials Evaluation: Conceptual Refinements and Practical Reforms

Regarding the widespread and ever-increasing applications of biomaterials in different medical fields, their accurate assessment is of great importance. Hence the safety and efficacy of biomaterials is confirmed only through the evaluation process, the way it is done has direct effects on public health. Although every biomaterial undergoes rigorous premarket evaluation, the regulatory agencies receive a considerable number of complications and adverse event reports annually. The main factors that challenge the process of biomaterials evaluation are dissimilar regulations, asynchrony of biomaterials evaluation and biomaterials development, inherent biases of postmarketing data, and cost and timing issues. Several pieces of evidence indicate that current medical device regulations need to be improved so that they can be used more effectively in the evaluation of biomaterials. This article provides suggested conceptual refinements and practical reforms to increase the efficiency and effectiveness of the existing regulations. The main focus of the article is on strategies for evaluating biomaterials in US, and then in EU.

[1]  P. Teirstein,et al.  Retrieval and analysis of particulate debris after saphenous vein graft intervention. , 1999, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[2]  J M Polak,et al.  Scaffolds and biomaterials for tissue engineering: a review of clinical applications. , 2003, Clinical otolaryngology and allied sciences.

[3]  R. Jaffe,et al.  Late and very late thrombosis of drug-eluting stents: evolving concepts and perspectives. , 2007, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[4]  David Cebon,et al.  Biocompatibility: Meeting a Key Functional Requirement of Next-Generation Medical Devices , 2008, Toxicologic pathology.

[5]  M. Leon,et al.  Randomized Trial of a Distal Embolic Protection Device During Percutaneous Intervention of Saphenous Vein Aorto-Coronary Bypass Grafts , 2002, Circulation.

[6]  J. Shaw,et al.  Association of change in daily step count over five years with insulin sensitivity and adiposity: population based cohort study , 2011, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[7]  A. Kesselheim,et al.  How Does Medical Device Regulation Perform in the United States and the European Union? A Systematic Review , 2012, PLoS medicine.

[8]  D. Kaplan,et al.  Porosity of 3D biomaterial scaffolds and osteogenesis. , 2005, Biomaterials.

[9]  Anil K Patri,et al.  Method for analysis of nanoparticle hemolytic properties in vitro. , 2008, Nano letters.

[10]  D. F. Williams,et al.  The Williams dictionary of biomaterials , 1999 .

[11]  Yanan Du,et al.  Biomaterials as carrier, barrier and reactor for cell-based regenerative medicine , 2015, Protein & Cell.

[12]  D. Cohen Out of joint: The story of the ASR , 2011, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[13]  Valeri Craigle MedWatch–The FDA Safety Information and Adverse Event-Reporting Program , 2007, Red Book (2012).

[14]  D. Zuckerman,et al.  Medical device recalls and the FDA approval process. , 2011, Archives of internal medicine.

[15]  Joshua A Hirsch,et al.  The FDA approval process for medical devices: an inherently flawed system or a valuable pathway for innovation? , 2012, Journal of NeuroInterventional Surgery.

[16]  Amogh C. Tathe,et al.  A BRIEF REVIEW: BIOMATERIALS AND THEIR APLLICATION , 2010 .

[17]  Stephen Amato,et al.  Regulatory affairs for biomaterials and medical devices , 2015 .

[18]  M. Kretzschmar,et al.  New Methodology for Estimating the Burden of Infectious Diseases in Europe , 2012, PLoS medicine.

[19]  David F. Williams On the mechanisms of biocompatibility. , 2008, Biomaterials.

[20]  Lesley Reeve,et al.  Biocompatibility assessments for medical devices – evolving regulatory considerations , 2017, Expert review of medical devices.

[21]  Buddy D. Ratner,et al.  Biomaterials Science: An Introduction to Materials in Medicine , 1996 .

[22]  Innovation OR Stagnation Challenge and Opportunity on the Critical Path to New Medical Products , 2004 .

[23]  Elena Bekerman,et al.  Combating emerging viral threats , 2015, Science.

[24]  Fotios Papadimitrakopoulos,et al.  Biomaterials/Tissue Interactions: Possible Solutions to Overcome Foreign Body Response , 2010, The AAPS Journal.

[25]  Buddy D Ratner,et al.  A pore way to heal and regenerate: 21st century thinking on biocompatibility , 2016, Regenerative biomaterials.

[26]  David F. Williams On the nature of biomaterials. , 2009, Biomaterials.

[27]  Cinzia Greco The Poly Implant Prothèse breast prostheses scandal: Embodied risk and social suffering. , 2015, Social science & medicine.