513(f) of the act) into class III without any grace period and FDA must have issued an order approving a PMA or declaring completed a PDP for the device before the device is commercially distributed unless it is reclassified. If FDA knows that a device being commercially distributed may be a ‘‘new’’ device as defined in this section because of any new intended use or other reasons, FDA may codify the statutory classification of the device into class III for such new use. Accordingly, the regulation for such a class III device states that as of the enactment date of the amendments, May 28, 1976, the device must have an approval under section 515 of the act before commercial distribution.
(c) A device identified in a regulation in this part that is classified into class III and that is subject to the transitional provisions of section 520(1) of the act is automatically classified by statute into class III and must have an approval under section 515 of the act before being commercially distributed. Accordingly, the regulation for such a class III transitional device states that as of the enactment date of the amendments, May 28, 1976, the device must have an approval under section 515 of the act before commercial distribution.
§ 888.5 Resurfacing technique.
Because of resurfacing techniques, certain joint prostheses require far less bone resection than other devices intended to repair or replace the same joint. The amount of bone resection may or may not affect the safety and effectiveness of the implantation of the prosthesis. When a resurfacing technique is used, the name of the prosthesis includes this information.
§ 888.6 Degree of constraint.
Certain joint prostheses provide more constraint of joint movement than others. FDA believes that the degree of constraint is an important factor affecting the safety and effectiveness of orthopedic prostheses. FDA is defining the following standard terms for categorizing the degree of constraint.
(a) A “constrained” joint prosthesis is used for joint replacement and prevents dislocation of the prosthesis in more than one anatomic plane and con-sists of either a single, flexible, across- the-joint component or more than one componentlinked together or affined.
(b) A ‘‘semi-constrained’’ joint prosthesis is used for partial or total joint replacement and limits translation and rotation of the prosthesis in one or more planes via the geometry of its articulating surfaces. It has no across- the-joint linkage.
(c) A ‘‘non-constrained’’ joint prosthesis is used for partial or total joint replacement and restricts minimally prosthesis movement in one or more planes. Its components have no across- the-joint linkage.
§ 888.9 Limitations of exemptions from section 510(k) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the act).
The exemption from the requirement of premarket notification (section 510(k) of the act) for a generic type of class I or II device is only to the extent that the device has existing or reasonably foreseeable characteristics of commercially distributed devices within that generic type or, in the case of in vitro diagnostic devices, only to the extent that misdiagnosis as a result of using the device would not be associated with high morbidity or mortality. Accordingly, manufacturers of any commercially distributed class I or II device for which FDA has granted an exemption from the requirement of premarket notification must still submit a premarket notification to FDA before introducing or delivering for introduction into interstate commerce for commercial distribution the device when:
(a) The device is intended for a use different from the intended use of a legally marketed device in that generic type of device; e.g., the device is intended for a different medical purpose, or the device is intended for lay use where the former intended use was by health care professionals only;
(b) The modified device operates using a different fundamental scientific technology than a legally marketed device in that generic type of device; e.g., a surgical instrument cuts tissue with a laser beam rather than with a sharpened metal blade, or an in vitro diagnostic device detects or identifies infectious agents by using
- FDA Defense of its Decision to Grant PMA to Smith & Nephew’s BHR… (earlsview.com)
- FDA Pre Market Approval (PMA) of Birmingham Hip Resurfacing (BHR) System – P040033 (earlsview.com)
- Despite the Reasons AGAINST – FDA Advisory Panel Recommends Conditional Approval of Smith & Nephew’s BIRMINGHAM HIP Resurfacing Technology (earlsview.com)
- P040033: BIRMINGHAM HIP RESURFACING (BHR) SYSTEM by SMITH&NEPHEW ORTHOPAEDICS – FDAzilla Devices (earlsview.com)
- Smith & Nephew’s :Response to Wright Medical Technology’s Citizen’s Petition to Deny PPrIA P040033 (earlsview.com)
- Post-Approval Studies for Smith & Nephew BHR – NOT USEFUL (earlsview.com)
- Wright Medical’s Response to Smith & Nephew’s Response to WMT request to Deny BHR PMA (earlsview.com)
- Attachments to Wright Medical’s request to Deny PMA to Smith & Nephew BHR (earlsview.com)
- FDA PMA – how this hides the guilty and stops The Damaged and Suffering from getting Justice – Smith & Nephew (earlsview.com)
- Smith & Nephew – BHR PMA – FIRST OF A KIND PMA – WHO PULLED WHAT STRINGS???? (earlsview.com)