Abstract:Importance: The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) uses 510(k) clearance and premarket approval (PMA) pathways to ensure device safety before marketing. Premarket approval evaluates high-risk medical devices and requires clinical trials, whereas 510(k) clearance evaluates moderate-risk devices and relies on benchtop (nonclinical and biomechanical) and descriptive data. Existing literature suggests that the clinical trials required by PMA are associated with reduced risk of recall compared with devices granted 510(k) clearance. Several investigators have found weaknesses in pivotal PMA trials, raising safety concerns. Furthermore, methodological factors may have led to a previous underestimation of recall risk for devices with PMA.Objectives: To compare risk of recall and high-risk recall between devices that received 510(k) clearance and those that received PMA and to compare the risk of recall between devices for medical specialties.Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study compared devices with 510(k) clearance vs those with PMA that reached the market between January 1, 2008, and December 31, 2017. Two- to 12-year follow-up was obtained from the FDA's 510(k) and PMA medical device database. Orthopedic surgery was chosen arbitrarily as the reference category for analysis between specialties because no baseline exists. Statistical analysis was performed from February 1 to November 1, 2020.Main Outcomes and Measures: The FDA issues recalls for safety concerns. These recalls are stratified into class I, II, and III, with class I representing high-risk issues for serious harm or death. The main outcome was the hazard ratio of any recall and class I recall between devices with PMA and those with 510(k) clearance. The secondary outcome was the recall hazard ratio between specialties with respect to the reference category. A single Cox proportional hazards regression model evaluating the association of medical specialty and FDA approval pathway with the risk of recall was performed.Results: During the study period, 28 246 devices received 510(k) clearance and 310 devices (10.7%) received PMA; 3012 devices (10.7%) with 510(k) clearance and 84 devices (27.1%) with PMA were recalled. A total of 216 devices (0.8%) with 510(k) clearance and 16 devices (5.2%) with PMA had class I recalls. Devices with PMA compared with those with 510(k) clearance had a hazard ratio for recall of 2.74 (95% CI, 2.19-3.44; P < .001) and a hazard ratio for high-risk recall of 7.30 (95% CI, 4.39-12.13; P < .001). Only radiologic devices were associated with an increased risk of recall (hazard ratio, 1.57; 95% CI, 1.32-1.87; P < .001), whereas 6 specialties were assocated with a decreased risk compared with the orthopedic reference category: general and plastic surgery, otolaryngology, obstetrics and gynecology, physical medicine, hematology, and general hospital.Conclusions and Relevance: This study suggests that high-risk medical devices approved via PMA are associated with a greater risk of recall than previously reported. Most recalls are for devices with 510(k) clearance, also raising safety concerns. Strengthening postmarketing surveillance strategies and pivotal trials may improve device safety.

What Electrophysiologists Should Know about Cardiac Implantable Electronic Device Recalls

Navigating the Landscape of Medical Device Advisories: A Special Report from the Canadian Heart Rhythm Society Device Advisory Committee

Class I Recalls of Cardiovascular Devices Between 2013 and 2022 : A Cross-Sectional Analysis

Outcomes Before and After the Recall of a Heart Failure Pacemaker

Contemporary Management of Cardiac Implantable Electronic Device Infection: The American College of Cardiology COGNITO Survey

Cardiovascular Implantable Electronic Device Infections: A Contemporary Review

Prevalence and management of electrical lead abnormalities in cardiac implantable electronic device leads

Cardiac device creativity and innovation under constraints: Exploring trends from the food and drug administration's device clearances and recalls

Medical Device Recalls and the FDA Approval Process

Risk of Recall Among Medical Devices Undergoing US Food and Drug Administration 510(k) Clearance and Premarket Approval, 2008-2017

A Comprehensive Analysis of Class I Medical Device Recalls: Unveiling Patterns, Causes and Global Impacts

Risk Factors Associated with Higher Mortality in Patients with Cardiac Implantable Electronic Device Infection

Infective Endocarditis Involving Implanted Cardiac Electronic Devices: JACC Focus Seminar 1/4

Analysis of FDA Neuromodulation Device Recall in 2006-2015

Prevention and Management of Cardiac Implantable Electronic Device Infections: State-of-the-Art and Future Directions

Cardiac implantable electronic devices and cybersecurity

Cardiac implantable electronic devices in adults with tetralogy of Fallot

Long-Term Outpatient Care and Rehospitalizations in Patients after Cardiac Electrotherapy Device Implantation

Evidence-Based Strategies to Promote Long-Term Cardiac Implant Site Health: Review of the Literature

Cardiac Electronic Devices: Future Directions and Challenges

Cardiovascular implantable electronic device infections due to enterococcal species: Clinical features, management, and outcomes