向美国 FDA MAUDE 数据库报告的 3 种玻璃体切除术平台的相关不良事件。

IF 0.5 Q4 OPHTHALMOLOGY Journal of VitreoRetinal Diseases Pub Date : 2024-07-28 eCollection Date: 2024-09-01 DOI:10.1177/24741264241264356
Hannah H Hwang, Benjamin W Botsford, Tamara L Lenis, Mohammad Ali Sadiq, Abdallah Mahrous, Anton Orlin, Szilard Kiss, Donald J D'Amico, Sarah H Van Tassel, Kyle D Kovacs
{"title":"向美国 FDA MAUDE 数据库报告的 3 种玻璃体切除术平台的相关不良事件。","authors":"Hannah H Hwang, Benjamin W Botsford, Tamara L Lenis, Mohammad Ali Sadiq, Abdallah Mahrous, Anton Orlin, Szilard Kiss, Donald J D'Amico, Sarah H Van Tassel, Kyle D Kovacs","doi":"10.1177/24741264241264356","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Purpose:</b> To identify and describe adverse events (AEs) observed with real-world use of the following 3 vitrectomy platforms: Constellation (Alcon), Enhancing Visual Acuity (EVA, Dutch Ophthalmic Research Center), and Stellaris (Bausch + Lomb). <b>Methods:</b> All reports submitted to the US Food and Drug Administration's Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience (MAUDE) database between January 2010 and November 2021 that were associated with the 3 vitrectomy platforms were analyzed. Each report was reviewed for AEs or consequences and the type of complication noted. Duplicates and reports with an inadequate narrative to categorize the event were excluded. A descriptive analysis was performed for the prevalence of device-specific issues within each platform. <b>Results:</b> The analysis included 2534 reports (1738 Constellation, 117 EVA, 679 Stellaris). Overall, the most commonly reported complications involved the vitrectomy probe (n = 957 [37.8%]) and the central processing unit (n = 368 [14.5%]). Differences in the distribution of AEs among the platforms were noted, with vitrectomy probe issues being the most reported events for the Constellation and Stellaris and infusion issues for the EVA. Infusion issues most frequently led to reports of patient harm with the Constellation (31/1738 [1.8%]) and EVA (7/116 [6.0%]), while issues with the vitrectomy probe were reported with the Stellaris (11/679 [1.6%]). <b>Conclusions:</b> An analysis of real-world data in the MAUDE database highlighted the spectrum of device-specific AEs of greatest relevance to surgical practice. Familiarity with potential device complications will help minimize harm to patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":17919,"journal":{"name":"Journal of VitreoRetinal Diseases","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11418686/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Adverse Events Associated With 3 Vitrectomy Platforms Reported to the US FDA MAUDE Database.\",\"authors\":\"Hannah H Hwang, Benjamin W Botsford, Tamara L Lenis, Mohammad Ali Sadiq, Abdallah Mahrous, Anton Orlin, Szilard Kiss, Donald J D'Amico, Sarah H Van Tassel, Kyle D Kovacs\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/24741264241264356\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b>Purpose:</b> To identify and describe adverse events (AEs) observed with real-world use of the following 3 vitrectomy platforms: Constellation (Alcon), Enhancing Visual Acuity (EVA, Dutch Ophthalmic Research Center), and Stellaris (Bausch + Lomb). <b>Methods:</b> All reports submitted to the US Food and Drug Administration's Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience (MAUDE) database between January 2010 and November 2021 that were associated with the 3 vitrectomy platforms were analyzed. Each report was reviewed for AEs or consequences and the type of complication noted. Duplicates and reports with an inadequate narrative to categorize the event were excluded. A descriptive analysis was performed for the prevalence of device-specific issues within each platform. <b>Results:</b> The analysis included 2534 reports (1738 Constellation, 117 EVA, 679 Stellaris). Overall, the most commonly reported complications involved the vitrectomy probe (n = 957 [37.8%]) and the central processing unit (n = 368 [14.5%]). Differences in the distribution of AEs among the platforms were noted, with vitrectomy probe issues being the most reported events for the Constellation and Stellaris and infusion issues for the EVA. Infusion issues most frequently led to reports of patient harm with the Constellation (31/1738 [1.8%]) and EVA (7/116 [6.0%]), while issues with the vitrectomy probe were reported with the Stellaris (11/679 [1.6%]). <b>Conclusions:</b> An analysis of real-world data in the MAUDE database highlighted the spectrum of device-specific AEs of greatest relevance to surgical practice. Familiarity with potential device complications will help minimize harm to patients.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":17919,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of VitreoRetinal Diseases\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11418686/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of VitreoRetinal Diseases\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/24741264241264356\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/9/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"OPHTHALMOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of VitreoRetinal Diseases","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/24741264241264356","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/9/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:确定并描述实际使用以下 3 种玻璃体切割平台时观察到的不良事件 (AE):Constellation(爱尔康)、Enhancing Visual Acuity(EVA,荷兰眼科研究中心)和 Stellaris(博士伦)。方法:分析了 2010 年 1 月至 2021 年 11 月期间向美国食品药品管理局制造商和用户设施设备经验 (MAUDE) 数据库提交的与这三种玻璃体切割平台相关的所有报告。审查了每份报告中的 AE 或后果以及注意到的并发症类型。排除了重复报告和叙述不足以对事件进行分类的报告。对每个平台中特定设备问题的发生率进行了描述性分析。分析结果分析包括 2534 份报告(1738 份 Constellation 报告、117 份 EVA 报告和 679 份 Stellaris 报告)。总体而言,最常报告的并发症涉及玻璃体切割探针(n = 957 [37.8%])和中央处理单元(n = 368 [14.5%])。不同平台的 AE 分布存在差异,Constellation 和 Stellaris 报告最多的是玻璃体切割探针问题,而 EVA 报告最多的是输液问题。Constellation(31/1738 [1.8%])和EVA(7/116 [6.0%])的输液问题最常导致患者伤害报告,而Stellaris(11/679 [1.6%])的玻璃体切割探针问题报告较多。结论:对 MAUDE 数据库中真实世界数据的分析强调了与手术实践最相关的设备特异性 AEs 的范围。熟悉潜在的器械并发症有助于最大限度地减少对患者的伤害。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Adverse Events Associated With 3 Vitrectomy Platforms Reported to the US FDA MAUDE Database.

Purpose: To identify and describe adverse events (AEs) observed with real-world use of the following 3 vitrectomy platforms: Constellation (Alcon), Enhancing Visual Acuity (EVA, Dutch Ophthalmic Research Center), and Stellaris (Bausch + Lomb). Methods: All reports submitted to the US Food and Drug Administration's Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience (MAUDE) database between January 2010 and November 2021 that were associated with the 3 vitrectomy platforms were analyzed. Each report was reviewed for AEs or consequences and the type of complication noted. Duplicates and reports with an inadequate narrative to categorize the event were excluded. A descriptive analysis was performed for the prevalence of device-specific issues within each platform. Results: The analysis included 2534 reports (1738 Constellation, 117 EVA, 679 Stellaris). Overall, the most commonly reported complications involved the vitrectomy probe (n = 957 [37.8%]) and the central processing unit (n = 368 [14.5%]). Differences in the distribution of AEs among the platforms were noted, with vitrectomy probe issues being the most reported events for the Constellation and Stellaris and infusion issues for the EVA. Infusion issues most frequently led to reports of patient harm with the Constellation (31/1738 [1.8%]) and EVA (7/116 [6.0%]), while issues with the vitrectomy probe were reported with the Stellaris (11/679 [1.6%]). Conclusions: An analysis of real-world data in the MAUDE database highlighted the spectrum of device-specific AEs of greatest relevance to surgical practice. Familiarity with potential device complications will help minimize harm to patients.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.20
自引率
16.70%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
From the Editor-in-Chief. Update on Retinal Drug Safety: Proceedings of the ASRS ReST Committee Webinar Part 1. Extended Intraocular Drug-Delivery Platforms for the Treatment of Retinal and Choroidal Diseases. Successful Treatment of Central Retinal Artery Occlusion With Tissue Plasminogen Activator Followed by Recurrent Retinal Ischemia 2024 Distinguished Contributor Awards.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1