Sunday, October 31, 2010

Non-Coring (Huber) Needles investigation safety: updated 26. August 2010

Error in deserializing body of reply message for operation 'Translate'. The maximum string content length quota (8192) has been exceeded while reading XML data. This quota may be increased by changing the MaxStringContentLength property on the XmlDictionaryReaderQuotas object used when creating the XML reader. Line 1, position 9125.
Error in deserializing body of reply message for operation 'Translate'. The maximum string content length quota (8192) has been exceeded while reading XML data. This quota may be increased by changing the MaxStringContentLength property on the XmlDictionaryReaderQuotas object used when creating the XML reader. Line 1, position 9516.

Original Date Issued: January 26, 2010

Date updated: August 26, 2010

Audience: Healthcare Practitioners and Patients/Caregivers

Medical Specialties: Multiple, including Interventional Radiologists, Oncologists, Infusion Nurses

Huber needles are used to access ports implanted under the skin of chronically ill patients for repeated access to veins for the withdrawal of blood and infusion of medication, nutritional solutions, blood products, and imaging solutions. These needles should be designed to penetrate the port without cutting and dislodging any silicone cores (or slivers) from the ports into which they are inserted.

The core: part of septum material cut by the sharp needle heel.
The core: part of septum
material cut by the sharp
needle heel.

[Back to Top]

Following hospital reports to the FDA of leakage after accessing the port with a Huber needle (labeled to be non-coring), the agency conducted its own laboratory testing of Huber needles from multiple manufacturers. This testing showed that certain Huber needles produced cores when inserted into ports.

UPDATE: August 26, 2010

FDA continues its investigation through the inspection of Huber needle manufacturers. Inspections found increases in incidents of coring with Huber needles. The agency is continuing its investigation and will update the public if there are new developments. FDA is working with manufacturers to implement coring tests to detect and reduce the occurrence of coring in Huber needles. See FDA Activities below for recalls.

FDA has received reports related to silicone foreign bodies released from Huber needles after accessing an implantable port. The agency has also received reports of port leakage. However, because it may be very difficult for clinicians to associate adverse patient outcomes with the use of defective Huber needles, there may be under-reporting of adverse events.  

[Back to Top]

While a more thorough investigation of this situation continues, FDA continues to recommend that health care professionals consider taking the following precautions:  

Avoid flushing the syringe when initially confirming needle patency upon accessing the port. If the needle has cored the port, flushing may introduce the core into the patient’s body, and could lead to serious adverse events.When possible, upon accessing the port, consider aspirating a small amount of blood from the port after septum puncture, then discard the syringe with its contents. This step may recapture the silicone sliver. If the needle becomes clogged when attempting to aspirate, remove the needle, discard it and select a new one.Watch for signs and/or symptoms that may indicate damage to the port’s septum, such as medication leakage resulting in inadequate therapy delivery, along with tissue, nerve and/or muscle damage; and redness of the surrounding area.Patients should continue to follow their doctor’s recommendations for receiving treatment.

[Back to Top]

On August 26, 2010, the FDA announced a Class I recall of certain models and lot numbers of Multi-Med, Inc. 22 Gauge x 1” straight Huber needles and 22 Gauge Right Angle x 1” Huber needles. These Huber needles were sold exclusively to Navilyst Medical, Inc. Navilyst distributed the needles as a component of Vaxel Implantable Port Systems. Navilyst Medical, Inc. purchased Boston Scientific Oncology Division in 2008; therefore, some recalled Vaxel Implantable Port Systems may have Boston Scientific labeling.

Inspections conducted on samples of needles collected from Navilyst in September and November 2009 found two lots of Multi-Med needles that produced cores. WEAC’s testing results determined 23 to 86 percent of Navilyst’s sample lots collected cored. More than 54,000 units are subject to this recall. These devices were manufactured from May 2, 2007 to May 1, 2010 and were distributed from May 2, 2007 to May 1, 2010.

The affected units include:

Multi-Med, Inc.

22 Gauge x 1” straight Huber needles
Model 10600218, Lot 9B020M22 Gauge Right Angle x 1” Huber needles
Model 10600219, Lot 9B017M

Navilyst Medical, Inc.*

Certain lots of Vaxcel Implantable Vascular Access Systems with PASV Valve TechnologyCertain lots of Vaxcel Implantable Vascular Access Systems

* Navilyst Medical Inc. bought Boston Scientific Oncology Division in 2008; therefore, some recalled Vaxcel Implantable Vascular Access Systems are labeled as Boston Scientific products.

See the recall notice for a complete listing of the affected products.

Facilities that have products affected by the recall should immediately discontinue the use of the needles and return unused product to Navilyst Medical, Inc. Navilyst Medical, Inc. may be contacted at 800-833-9973 between 8:30 AM and 7:00 PM Eastern Standard Time and by fax at 518-742-4450.

[Back to Top]

On January 26, 2010, the FDA announced a Class I recall of Exel/Exelint Huber needles, Exel/Exelint Huber Infusion Sets and Exel/Exelint “Securetouch+” Safety Huber Infusion Sets, manufactured by Nipro Medical Corporation for Exelint International Corporation.

Inspections conducted in October 2009 of Nipro facilities in Japan found that their needles “cored” in 60 to 72 percent of tests. The reason for this coring is related to design and manufacturing processes, which the FDA continues to investigate.

There are more than 2 million units impacted by this recall in distribution nationwide. Exelint does not export the Huber needles after receiving them from their Japanese contract manufacturer. We are not aware of Nipro exporting to other countries from Japan. Recalled needles were manufactured from January 2007 to August 2009. Units subject to recall have a lot number that begins with “07,” “08,” “09,” and one of the following product codes or catalog numbers:

26901
26902
26904
26906
26907
26908
26909
26911
26921
26922
26923
26924
26925

With/Injection Site:

27940R
27941R
27944R
27945R
27946R
27948R
27949R
27950R

Without/Injection Site Product Codes/Catalog Numbers:

27954R
27955R
27958R
27959R

37854S
37855S
37858S

Hospitals, clinics and patients who have needles from these lists should immediately stop using these affected products and return any unused products to Exelint International Corporation. Direct all questions concerning this recall to:

Attn: Armand Hamid
EXEL International
5408 West Centinela Ave
Los Angeles, Calif. 90045-1504
Tel. 800-940-3935
Fax 800-308-5048
E-mail: info@exelint.com

[Back to Top]

In 2009, the FDA issued a letter to manufacturers of other Huber needles to address design and manufacturing concerns. The FDA continues to work closely with all manufacturers of Huber needles to understand the potential causes for coring and identify corrective measures

[Back to Top]

Prompt reporting of adverse events can help FDA identify and better understand the risks associated with medical devices. If you suspect coring problems with Huber needles, we encourage you to file a voluntary report through MedWatch, the FDA Safety Information and Adverse Event Reporting program.

Healthcare personnel employed by facilities that are subject to FDA's user facility reporting requirements should follow the reporting procedures established by their facilities.

Device manufacturers must comply with the Medical Device Report (MDR) regulations

To help us learn as much as possible about the adverse events associated with Huber needles, please include the following information in your reports, if available:

Patient information (age, indication for use, existing medical conditions)Details of the adverse eventTherapy being infusedPort information (type, manufacturer, anatomical location)Type of Huber needle used (manufacturer, lot/serial numbers)Unexpected health issues (such as stroke or MI)

[Back to Top]

If you have questions about this communication, please contact the Division of Small Manufacturers, International and Consumer Assistance (DSMICA) at DSMICA@CDRH.FDA.GOV or 800-638-2041.

[Back to Top]

Other documents associated with this issue can be found at:
http://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/ Safety/AlertsandNotices/ucm198719.htm

[Back to Top]

This document reflects FDA’s current analysis of available information, in keeping with our commitment to inform the public about ongoing safety reviews of medical devices. The nature, magnitude and possible public health impact of this situation are not yet clear.

    

Office of device evaluation annual performance report fiscal year 2009

Page last updated: 08/24/2010
Note: If you want to use data in various file formats, see the help musical instruments and Downloading viewers.

Saturday, October 30, 2010

Know the Divorce Rules

If you are going through the trauma of divorce then it is the best to know the rules. Read on as we tell you some facts about divorce? Child support is an important issue in a divorce case. The laws across the various states of USA are more or less uniform on this. There are ...

View the original article here

Michigan Child Custody Laws

Michigan Child Custody Laws take into primary consideration the needs of the child more than any other factor. The law is very specific about maintaining as much stability in a child's life, and keeping as close a relationship as is possible with both parents after a divorce.

Joint Custody and Michigan Child Custody Laws

There is a law in Michigan which encourages joint custody arrangements be made in a divorce child custody case. Under this law, both parents would have equal say in all the major decisions of their children's lives such as which schools to attend, what religion to follow, or any major medical decisions, just to name a few.

Physical custody of a child is then awarded to one, or both of the parents. Physical custody involves who the child will live with primarily, and who will be responsible for the child's day to day welfare. If, for example, one parent is going to be staying in the home where the child already lives, then this may be a factor in awarding that parent physical custody, so the child's life is disrupted as little as possible.

Giving Parents Equal Rights

The parent who does not have physical custody of a child is then given what is called, "parenting time", in which he or she visits with or has the child stay with them on a regular basis. (Alternate weekends, holidays, vacation periods, etc.) Again, the goal with Michigan child custody laws is to make things as smooth as possible for the children after a divorce, and being able to keep both parents in their lives is important.


View the original article here

Joint Child Custody

Joint child custody is something that occurs when both parents are given equal rights regarding custody of their children. These rights can take the form of legal, versus physical custody.

Legal and Physical Custody

Legal joint child custody involves the ability by both parents to make all the major decisions in their children's lives. These include matters such as where they will go to school, what religion they will be educated in, or any major medical decisions regarding the children. Legal custody can also involve issues such as child support.

Physical custody on the other hand has to do with which parent a child will live most of the time. This is where the term, "Weekend Father" comes from. Most of the time, children live with Mom during the week, and visit Dad on weekends, holidays, or vacations. More and more however, this policy is changing. Both parents do after all have equal child custody rights in the eyes of the law, and a father has, at least ideally, as much a chance of being awarded physical custody of his children as the mother does.

Joint Child Custody and Marriage

The thing to keep in mind is that joint custody of children is an issue parents must cooperate about as much as possible. Even after a divorce, a mother and father will always be a part of each other's lives, as long as they both love and play an equal part in their children's lives as well.


View the original article here

Sunday, October 24, 2010

Only Your Wisconsin Child Custody Lawyer Knows Best

Every Wisconsin child custody lawyer knows that this is one of the cases where people are likely to do things that they have not done before or thought they are not capable of. With divorce and child custody cases not having the satisfactory results that they should have, parents turn to desperate means of getting ...

View the original article here

One-On-One With A Dallas Child Custody Lawyer

How can you win custody over your child?Is there a need for you to have an ample amount of money to gain custody over your child?Do you need to have a good house or house help so that the guardianship will be granted to you?The above questions and more linger in your mind after rigorous ...

View the original article here

Texas Child Custody Laws

When looking at Texas child custody laws, there are three major categories to understand. These categories have to do with conservatorship, or the conditions under which a parent or guardian will have custody over a child.

Conservatorship and Texas Child Custody Laws

The first legal category of child custody is what's known as sole managing conservatorship. Basically, the parent or guardian in question makes all the major decisions in a child's life, and is the sole person responsible for his or her upbringing. Next is sole possessory conservatorship. In this situation, one parent still makes all the major decisions in a child's life, and is the one he or she lives with, but the other parent is granted visitation rights, and is responsible for the child while in that parent's care.

Third, and most preferably, Texas child custody laws will award joint managing conservatorship to both parents, so that both the mother and father play as much of an equal role as possible in the child's upbringing. In just about every state, it's a given that the best interests of a child's well being involve the inclusion of both parents in their lives as much as possible.

Understanding Child Custody Issues

Child custody laws in Texas take many factors under consideration in a divorce situation, and will even provide counseling for parents and children if need be, in order to settle child custody matters as smoothly as possible. A divorce is difficult for all parties involved, whether they be parents or children, and making thing easier is always of primary concern.


View the original article here

Saturday, October 23, 2010

PowellsBooks.news Jan 15 2009

We understand, it's difficult to pick just one book for your 2008 Puddly Award selection. You're making lists, scanning your shelves, poring back over your GoodReads entries. Give your mind a rest — and maybe a recharge — with our interview with Temple Grandin, plus signed editions of her new book, Animals Makes Us Human. We'd like to inaugurate original essays by Jay Mathews (Work Hard. Be Nice.), Norman Bussel (My Private War), Philipp Blom (The Vertigo Years), and Bernard Cornwell (Agincourt). This time around we have but one, lone INK Q&A, by Hannah Holmes (The Well-Dressed Ape), so please — give it some love! And don't miss guest bloggers Peter Wild (Noise: Fiction Inspired by Sonic Youth) and John Niven (Kill Your Friends). Now, get out there and show your Puddly!

View the original article here

Tennessee Child Custody Laws

Tennessee child custody laws take the best interests of the children into account when deliberating over any kind of child custody settlement after divorce. As such, joint custody of children by both parents is not always possible.

Navigating Tennessee Child Custody Laws

Although it may be preferable to have equal child custody rights by both parents, this is by no means a given. A parent who's abusive, negligent, or guilty of substance abuse can be denied parental custody. Also, the parent's ability to support their children is a major factor. If a parent doesn't have a job, or if providing proper care for a child is beyond their physical, mental, or financial means, the parent who does have those means will be given primary, or even sole custody.

A Child's Say

In some instances, a judge will listen to a younger child's input when deciding a child custody case. But this can be a difficult way to obtain an accurate idea of what will be in that child's best interests. Parents can persuade their children into saying whatever they want, or by bad mouthing the other parent. A judge will however give greater credence to the wishes or testimony of an older child.

Again, like all states, Tennessee child custody laws only want what is best for a child. Deciding which parent is most fit to be granted primary custody of their children is no simple task. Tennessee law will weigh many factors before coming to a decision.


View the original article here

PowellsBooks.news Mar 11 2009

Is it the close proximity of St. Patrick's Day to the spring equinox that has resulted in the Annual Leprechaun Hunt? Hundreds of little Irish critters overtake Portland for a few days each year, bounding around open fields and even dancing little jigs across freeways, warbling their high-pitched renditions of "Danny Boy" all the way. Sometimes you catch one and get their pot of gold, but we've already got our treasure, starting with our interview with Peter Singer (The Life You Can Save) and signed editions by Abraham Verghese (Cutting for Stone) and Keith Donohue (Angels of Destruction). We love Lucky Charms, but we'll trade those fun marshmallow shapes for original essays by Tim Davys (Amberville), Christopher Benfey (A Summer of Hummingbirds), Jeffrey Moussaieff Masson (The Face on Your Plate), and Matthue Roth (Candy in Action), plus a Powell's Q&A by Lev Yilmaz (Sunny Side Down), blue clovers, and green diamonds. And we leave you with guest bloggers Zo Heller and Robert Sullivan river-dancing the little green-suited scamps right into our nets...

View the original article here

PowellsBooks.news Jun 4 2009

The unexpectedly warm weather makes us lazy and content — too lazy and content to come up with our own text for this introduction. Therefore, we're letting our beloved readers Mad Lib for us. We have a(n) ?????(adjective)?? ??? interview with China Miville, along with signed first editions of his new novel, The City and the City, and Chuck Palahniuk's Pygmy. Our original essays inspire unique reactions: John Crowley (Four Freedoms) makes us want to ????? (verb)?????; Deanne Stillman (Mustang) reminds us of ?????(adjective)??? ?? ?????(plural noun)??? ?? in the springtime; Tess Callahn (April and Oliver) inspires us to ?????(verb)????? our favorite ?????(noun)????? ; and we ?????(verb)????? for Deyan Sudjic (The Language of Things). Don't forget our ?????(adjective)????? Powell's Q&A with Lisa See (Shanghai Girls), not to mention a bevy of ??? ??(adjective)????? guest bloggers: the contributors to Conjunctions 52 and Portland Noir.

View the original article here

PowellsBooks.news Apr 8 2009

Runny noses... check. Uncontrollable sneezing fits... check. Itchy, watery eyes... check. Hurray, it's spring! And we're inviting you to celebrate with us by frolicking through fields of books. We'll start with interviewee Michael Perry, whose Coop makes a fragrant addition to any seasonal bouquet (signed or otherwise). Next, we'll make daisy chains with original essayists Andrea Wulf (The Brother Gardeners), Joanna Smith Rakoff (A Fortunate Age), Bernd Heinrich (Summer World), Marjorie Kernan (The Ballad of West Tenth Street), and Darren Littlejohn (The 12-Step Buddhist), while tucking Q&A author Arthur Phillips's The Song Is You behind our ears. Then we'll join hands with guest bloggers Michael Muhammad Knight and Rupert Isaacson to get a running start before we all leap onto a soft pile of Spring Fever Sale paperbacks! (BYO hay fever medication.)

View the original article here

Top Legal Advice Child Custody - Winning Child Custody

No other situation compares to a child custody war. It takes much choice, deep thought and preparation in strategizing out o

View the original article here

Friday, October 22, 2010

PowellsBooks.news Jan 28 2009

We don't want to make our new squirrel mascot, Morrison, green with envy (we like his brown coat), but we've been keeping a keen eye on a certain groundhog in a certain town in Pennsylvania. Between sudden blizzards and bursts of freezing-cold sunshine, this has been a deeply strange winter, and we're sure hoping that little critter doesn't see his shadow on February 2. If we end up with six more weeks of winter, at least we have a new season of Lost to watch on TV — and J. Wood's fantastically insightful blog posts to guide us! Or perhaps we'll savor our signed first editions of Calvin Trillin's Deciding the Next Decider and Walter Mosley's The Right Mistake. If it gets too cold again, we can wrap ourselves in original essays by Lauren Groff (Delicate Edible Birds), Dacher Keltner (Born to Be Good), and Jonathan Barnes (The Domino Men) — after we've read them, of course — and warm our feet over toasty Q&As from Erica Bauermeister (The School of Essential Ingredients) and Neil deGrasse Tyson (The Pluto Files). If things get too dark and gloomy, we have guest bloggers Jonah Lehrer (How We Decide) and Matt Love (Citadel of the Spirit) to light our way. Then again, if we get an early groundhog reprieve, we'll do exactly the same things — only in shorts and T-shirts, sitting out in the sun, with huge smiles on our faces.

View the original article here

PowellsBooks.news Jan 28 2009

We don't want to make our new squirrel mascot, Morrison, green with envy (we like his brown coat), but we've been keeping a keen eye on a certain groundhog in a certain town in Pennsylvania. Between sudden blizzards and bursts of freezing-cold sunshine, this has been a deeply strange winter, and we're sure hoping that little critter doesn't see his shadow on February 2. If we end up with six more weeks of winter, at least we have a new season of Lost to watch on TV — and J. Wood's fantastically insightful blog posts to guide us! Or perhaps we'll savor our signed first editions of Calvin Trillin's Deciding the Next Decider and Walter Mosley's The Right Mistake. If it gets too cold again, we can wrap ourselves in original essays by Lauren Groff (Delicate Edible Birds), Dacher Keltner (Born to Be Good), and Jonathan Barnes (The Domino Men) — after we've read them, of course — and warm our feet over toasty Q&As from Erica Bauermeister (The School of Essential Ingredients) and Neil deGrasse Tyson (The Pluto Files). If things get too dark and gloomy, we have guest bloggers Jonah Lehrer (How We Decide) and Matt Love (Citadel of the Spirit) to light our way. Then again, if we get an early groundhog reprieve, we'll do exactly the same things — only in shorts and T-shirts, sitting out in the sun, with huge smiles on our faces.

View the original article here

Thursday, October 21, 2010

Wednesday, October 20, 2010

Virginia Child Custody Laws

Virginia child custody laws are very strict about making sure both parents understand and live up to their parental roles. Some interesting insights have come from the years of judicial experience in Virginia child custody cases.

How Virginia Child Custody Laws View Divorce

The main thing that the courts in Virginia emphasize is that no matter how much you may wish to have a former spouse out of your life, they will always be a part of your life as long as your children are minors. Children must see that their parents get along, agree on disciplinary issues, and that they are both still going to continue to play as active a role as possible in their upbringing

Parents are encouraged to place their personal feelings towards one another aside where the kids are concerned. A child should never be made to resent a parent, as this can lead to severe emotional problems for them down the road. Parents should always make sure their children have a positive view of both their mother and father.

Not Their Fault

Finally, Virginia child custody laws encourage parents to make sure their children understand that the reasons for a divorce have nothing to do with them. It's very natural for children to feel guilty, or think they somehow are responsible for parents splitting up. To make sure child custody matters like this don't psychologically scar a child, both parents must go to great lengths to reassure, and most of all, be as loving to their children as they can.


View the original article here

Waiting on the Judges Decision in a Child Custody Case - Winning Child Custody

Now that you have filed a complaint of custody, been into conferences and hearings, it's the

View the original article here

Monday, October 18, 2010

When to Use a Family Law Attorney

A family law attorney can help any family with the various problems that arise throughout the lifetime of a family. Those problems can be divorce, child custody, child support, child visitation, domestic violence, marital assets, spousal support, restraining orders and much more. A family is the foundation of the United States and sometimes families just ...

View the original article here

Sunday, October 17, 2010

What Is Joint Custody of a Child? - Winning Child Custody

We have made mention that several child custody agreements exist to suit the needs of parents and their children. Among thes

View the original article here

Who Gets Custody Of Child In Divorce - Winning Child Custody

Deciding on who the child gets to live with or residency arrangements for your children after you and your partner break up

View the original article here

Winning Child Custody Evaluations - winning and child custody

Child custody evaluation processes are the compilations of information and formulation of themes, opinions and recommendatio

View the original article here

Winning Child Custody - win your child custody war

Many sole or full child custody issues have been resolved because of how parents handle child custody cases. Winning child c

View the original article here

Friday, October 15, 2010

Positive change in the Bloodstream infections and Cataract connectors: the first communication to the

Sent date: 11. August 2010


Public:Health professionals


Medical Specialty:Infection Control


A summary of the issue and scope:


A number of peer review, clinical trials, a report on the putting into service and use of positive displacement, as well as health-care establishments needleless connectors to the reduction of infection after changing to another type of bloodstream infections needleless connector.However, the amount of the bloodstream infection risk compared to other needleless devices, these connectors, or whether the risk of some or all of the information relating to the positive displacement is probably the connectors were incomplete. FDA is ordering product safety to better understand the use of bloodstream infections, the risk of positive displacement connectors needleless.


Device:


Positive displacement needleless connector is part of the system, with regard to the use of intravascular needleless. these devices can also be referred to as the "activated luer valves," "connectors," or "run" and may refer to the "positive pressure" or "positive displacement", their descriptions.


Healthcare Professionals recommendations:


In 2008, the two professional associations adopted guidelines for the small hospital acquired infections (http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/toc/iche/2008/29/s1).disclaimer icon For the purpose of these guidelines, in so far as it is not, as a matter of routine, "do not use positive pressure connectors mechanical valves before needleless risks, benefits and proper management of a foods natural appetite suppressors
thorough assessment of the training."FDA's original assessment supports this recommendation.


Postmarket Surveillance Studies


FDA requires companies that produce positive displacement postmarket surveillance tests needleless connectors. studies clarify these devices in order to limit the risk of infection and the risks and benefits. manufacturers shall provide for the collection of information to patients who have received the patients who have received compared with other types of connectors needleless devices bloodstream infections: for more information, see the FDA Letter infection control professionals.


Reporting problems with FDA


Prompt notification of adverse events to help the FDA identify and better understand the risks associated with medical. If you suspect problems with the use of positive displacement needleless connectors, we recommend a voluntary report, FDA MedWatch safety information and events through the reporting program to a file. medical devices by the FDA for reporting in device action is subject to the staff in their facilities reporting procedures.


Health care providers are invited to inform the port facility also infected control staff, where they have doubts concerning the positive displacement connector into the bloodstream infection needleless.


Contact information:


If you have any questions about communication, contact small manufacturers Division, International and Consumer Assistance (DSMICA) dsmica@fda.hhs.gov or 800-638-2041.


For more information about:


This document reflects the FDA in accordance with the information available to the public are informed of the ongoing safety reviews of medical devices in order to reinforce our commitment to the nature of the current analysis., and this situation will not be liable for any public health effects are not yet clear.

    

Thursday, October 14, 2010

Public Workshop-Medical device User fee program public meeting, 14. September 2010

August 27: Added Webinar PresentationsAugust 26: Updated Agenda and LocationThe purpose of the workshop is to provide an opportunity for stakeholders to present their views on the medical device user fee program. We welcome this opportunity to hear from stakeholders as we begin the next reauthorization process.The meeting will be held at:The Marriott Inn and Conference Center, UMUC 3501 University Blvd E Hyattsville, MD 20783 Phone: 301-985-7300 www.marriott.com/wasum[Back to Top]The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing a public meeting on the medical device user fee program, originally enacted in the Medical Device User Fee and Modernization Act (MDUFMA), and renewed in the Medical Device User Fee Amendments of 2007 (MDUFA). The legislative authority for the medical device user fee program expires in September 2012. At that time, new legislation will be required for FDA to continue collecting user fees for the medical device program. The Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act) requires that before FDA begins negotiations with the regulated industry on medical device user fee program reauthorization, we hold a public meeting at which the public may present its views on the reauthorization and provide a period of 30 days after the public meeting to obtain written comments from the public suggesting changes. FDA invites public comment on the medical user fee program and suggestions regarding the commitments FDA should propose for the next reauthorized program.In the years preceding enactment of Medical Device User Fee and Modernization Act of 2002 (MDUFMA) (Public Law 107-250), FDA’s medical device program suffered a long-term, significant loss of resources that undermined the program’s capacity and performance. MDUFMA was enacted “in order to provide the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) with the resources necessary to better review medical devices, to enact needed regulatory reforms so that medical device manufacturers can bring their safe and effective devices to the American people at an earlier time, and to ensure that reprocessed medical devices are as safe and effective as original devices.”1 MDUFMA had a 5-year life and contained two particularly important features which relate to reauthorization:User fees for the review of medical device premarket applications, reports, supplements, and premarket notification maqui berry side effects submissions provided additional resources to make FDA reviews more timely, predictable, and transparent to applicants. MDUFMA fees and mandated appropriations for the medical device program, helped FDA expand available expertise, modernized its information management systems, provided new review options, and provided more guidance to prospective applicants. The ultimate goal was to approve and clear safe and effective medical devices more rapidly, benefiting applicants, the health care community, and most importantly, patients.Negotiated Performance goals for many types of premarket reviews provided FDA with benchmarks for measuring review improvements. These quantifiable goals became more demanding each year and include FDA decision goals and cycle goals (cycle goals refer to FDA actions prior to a final action on a submission). Under MDUFMA, FDA must also have met several other commitments that do not have specific time frames or direct measures of performance, such as expanding the use of meetings with industry, maintenance of current performance in review areas where specific performance goals have not been identified, and publication of additional guidance documents. Medical device user fees and increased appropriations were viewed by FDA, Congress, and industry stakeholders as essential to support high-quality, timely medical device reviews, and other activities critical to the device review program.MDUFMA provided for fee discounts and waivers for small businesses. Small businesses make up a large proportion of the medical device industry, and these discounts and waivers helped reduce the financial impact of the user fees on this sector of the device industry, which plays an important role in fostering innovation.The negotiated performance goals and commitments that did not have specific time frames or direct measures of performance set under MDUFMA were comprehensive and demanding. By FY 2007, a total of 85 performance goals and commitments were in effect. FDA provided periodic reports on its progress towards meeting these performance goals and commitments to its stakeholders and Congress. FDA also provided an annual financial report to Congress to help ensure transparency and accountability of its use of the additional resources provided by MDUFMA.In 2007, Congress reauthorized medical device user fees through fiscal year 2012 under the Medical Device User Fee Amendments of 2007(MDUFA) (title II of the Food and Drug Administration Amendments Act of 2007(FDAAA) (Public Law 110-85).Under MDUFA, the user fee program remained intact, with a few significant modifications to the program. The user fee framework was changed to provide a more reliable and stable funding stream. Specifically, MDUFA included establishment registration as a new fee type which provided a more predictable amount of funds that could be collected by the Agency in any given year. MDUFA also saw changes to the performance goals. Compared to MDUFMA, there were fewer performance goals under MDUFA, yet the goals were more demanding. Specifically, individual cycle goals were removed and tighter overall goals were implemented. This was done to facilitate a more interactive review process. Specific timelines were established under MDUFA for Modular PMAs and Real-Time PMA supplements, which were not established under MDUFMA in 2002.The purpose of the upcoming meeting is to hear stakeholder views on medical device user fee reauthorization as we consider the features to propose in the next medical device user fee program. FDA is interested in responses to the following two general questions and welcomes any other pertinent information stakeholders would like to share:What is your assessment of the overall performance of the medical device user fee program thus far?What aspects of the medical device user fee program should be retained, changed, or discontinued to further strengthen and improve the program?[Back to Top]The following video presentations on the medical device user fee program are designed to give the public more background information on the program. These pre-recorded seminars are in Windows Media Video format, are free of charge, and can be viewed at any time.Overview of User Fees and the Reauthorization Process (Malcolm Bertoni)This presentation provides a general overview of what user fee programs are, how user fee programs work at the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and the process to be followed as we work to support congressional reauthorization of the Medical Device User Fee Program in the year 2012. The presentation provides a general overview of how we will engage various stakeholder groups in the reauthorization process, beginning with the September 14, 2010 Medical Device User Fee Program’s Public Meeting.Device Development and Activities Supported by the Medical Device User Fee Program (Donald St. Pierre) This presentation provides an overview of how FDA regulates all types of medical devices and the role of the medical device user fee program in the process.Medical Device Review Program Performance (Barbara Zimmerman) This presentation provides a history of the evolution of the medical device user fee program. It also includes a detailed review of FDA’s medical device review performance under the current medical device user fee program which runs from 2007 through 2012.[Back to Top]September 14, 2010Panel 2 - Health Care Professional PerspectivesPanel 3 - Patient PerspectivesPanel 4 - Consumer PerspectivesPanel 5 - Scientific and Academic Expert PerspectivesPanel 6 - Regulated Industry Perspectives[Back to Top]Transcripts will be posted approximately two weeks after the Public Meeting.[Back to Top]Any person may submit written or electronic comments to the Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852 http://www.regulations.gov. Submit a single copy of electronic comments or two paper copies of any mailed comments, except that individuals may submit one paper copy. Comments are to be identified with the docket number [Docket No. 2010–N–0389]. Received comments may be seen in the Division of Dockets Management between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday. To ensure consideration, all comments must be received by October 14, 2010.[Back to Top]If you wish to attend this Workshop, you must register by close of business on September 8, 2010.There is no fee to register for the Workshop and registration will be on a first-come, first-served basis. Early registration is recommended because seating is limited. However, FDA may limit the number of participants from each organization based on space limitations to ensure representation of all stakeholder interest groups.Individuals who register by August 31, 2010 will receive e-mail confirmation by September 3, 2010. FDA will continue to accept registrations through September 8, 2010 and will provide remaining e-mail confirmations by September 10, 2010. We hope to be able to accommodate all interested parties who wish to attend in person; however, if space does not permit or if travel is a problem, please note that FDA plans to webcast the meeting live through a link on this website.Onsite registration on the day of the meeting will be based on space availability.If you wish to speak during the public comment session at the end of meeting, you must indicate this at the time of registration. FDA will do its best to accommodate requests to speak and will inform speakers, in advance, of the meeting, how much time they will be allotted. If you wish to speak, we recommend that you be available for the entire day as previous public meetings have occasionally moved ahead of schedule.If you need special accommodations due to a disability, or additional information regarding registration, please contact Jim Swink, Center for Devices and Radiological Health, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Avenue, Bldg. 66, Silver Spring, MD 20993, 301-796-6313, FAX: 301–847–8121, James.Swink@fda.hhs.gov. [Back to Top]James Swink, Food and DrugAdministration, Center for Devices &Radiological Health, 10903 NewHampshire Ave., Bldg. 66, rm. 1609,Silver Spring, MD 20993,301–796–6313,FAX: 301–847–8121,James.Swink@fda.hhs.gov[Back to Top]1 H.R. Rep. No. 107-728, at 21 (2002).    

Friday, October 1, 2010

Public Workshop-medical devices and nano-technologies: industry, description, and identify istutteiden, 23. September 2010

This workshop is designed to obtain information to take advantage of nanotechnology, efficiency and safety of medical devices. Specifically, FDA would like to include public input or EU criminal justice area medical devices and Diagnostics nanostructures, including manufacture, a description, and istutteiden assessment. FDA seeks information on these topics and solicit comments on a number of issues.

This workshop will be held on 23.September 2010 at the latest 8 am 5 pm.

Public workshop has been manufactured, keep at the Hilton Washington DC/North Gaithersburg, Maryland, 620 Perry Pkwy, Gaithersburg, MD 20877. Direction, please contact the hotel (301) 977-8900, or refer to their Web site at: www.gaithersburg.hilton.com

Meeting Webcast.

Public Workshop on medical devices and nano-technologies: industry, description, and how to determine whether the draft Agenda istutteiden

Date: September 23

Location:Hilton Washington DC/North Gaithersburg, Maryland, 620 Perry Pkwy, Gaithersburg, MD 20877,

Welcome/design day and logistics Session I medical devices containing or tietoliikenneprotokollat EU criminal justice area or nanostructures (production characterization)

Administrator's introduction of the Session I

-Scientific/regulatory considerations for discussion – [questions discussion] list of CDRH

Medical devices containing or tietoliikenneprotokollat EU criminal justice area or nanostructures manufacture/characterization and quality control (QC) considerations for

Expert speaker presentation (s)

Session I Roundtable discussion Session II: improved electrochemical cells (batteries)/bio-distribution evaluation damp containing or tietoliikenneprotokollat EU criminal justice area or nanostructures 

Administrator's introduction of Session II

-Scientific/regulatory considerations for discussion – [questions discussion] list of CDRH

Istutteiden/toxicological considerations for medical devices containing or tietoliikenneprotokollat EU criminal justice area or nanostructures

Expert speaker presentation (s)

Session II Roundtable discussion

The persons concerned must be registered not later than 15 September 2010.

There is no registration fee public workshop. Early registration is recommended, because the seats is limited to the date on which the General seminar, shall be adopted in accordance with the registration of the days from the date of the space available at 7: 30

If you want to make oral presentation at the workshop of making known their views during the sessions (see paragraph (II) additional data FR notice), this must be stated during the registration. FDA request that presentations focus on additional data for FR notice areas defined in section III. What do you want to address your presentation to a discussion topic to be identified. each discussion topic at hand were concentrated in the open session to keep each oral presentation should be treated with only one topic. FDA will do its best to requests to speak. registered participants can send to the contact person of written material oral presentations 5 p.m. 15.September 2010.

If you want to participate in the two planned round-table discussions (see section II FOR additional data FR notice), show that advantage when the registration and shall also produce a brief statement that describes the experience and expertise with the nanotechnologies. number of participants Is johtamismenetelmiä. FDA attempts to be represented in this chat room "constituencies" different. other public workshop attendance is given the opportunity to listen to the discussion of each johtamismenetelmiä and to the public in the comments, time allows.

If you need special Accommodations, please contact disabilidád thanks to Susan 301-796-5661, at susan.monahan@fda.hhs.gov at Monahan of at least 7 days in advance of the meeting.

Daya Ranamukhaarachchi
The Director of the Center CDRH
10903 New Hampshire Avenue
WO-66, room 5574
Silver Spring, MD 20993
(301) 796-6155
(301) 847-8512-Fax
Daya.ranamukhaarachchi@fda.hhs.gov