We use cookies to provide you with a better experience. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies in accordance with our Cookie Policy.
  • SKIP TO CONTENT
  • SKIP NAVIGATION
  • Drug Products
    • Books
    • FDAnews Books Library
    • Events
    • Form 483s Database
    • Subscription Newsletters
    • Free Newsletters
    • Webinar Training Pass
    • eCFR and Guidances
  • Device Products
    • Books
    • FDAnews Books Library
    • Events
    • Form 483s Database
    • Subscription Newsletters
    • Free Newsletters
    • Webinar Training Pass
    • eCFR and Guidances
  • Clinical Products
  • Advertising
  • White Papers
  • Contact Us
  • About Us
  • COVID-19
  • Sign In
  • Create Account
  • Sign Out
  • My Account
Home » FDA Workshop Examines RASD Challenges, Opportunities

FDA Workshop Examines RASD Challenges, Opportunities

July 31, 2015

With surgeons using robotically assisted surgical devices in new ways, the FDA wants more information on how to best assess these tools to ensure the safety of patients while enhancing innovation.

To that end, academics, clinicians and members of industry gathered last week at the FDA’s White Oak campus in Silver Spring, Md., to discuss questions related to interoperability, training and differentiating between general use and specific indications of RASDs.

William Maisel, deputy director for science and chief scientist at the FDA’s Center for Devices and Radiological Health, noted that healthcare providers are using devices in ways that the agency hasn’t thought of or off-label, adding that it would be a shame to not learn from these real-world examples. One way to capture lessons is through a national or international registry.

Currently, Intuitive Surgical’s da Vinci system is the only RASD marketed in the U.S. Its latest model, the SP999, was introduced last year. With more devicemakers looking to enter the RASD market in the coming years, the complex technology will pose regulatory challenges for the FDA, according to an agency white paper released ahead of the meeting.

This complexity only will increase with time, and the current definition of the technology is too narrow and will become “less useful,” as developers forge ahead with innovative products, according to Russell Taylor, PhD, the John C. Malone professor of computer science at The Johns Hopkins University.

While some might view this growing complexity as potentially leading to more adverse patient events, workshop presenter Daniel Herron, MD, professor of surgery at the Mount Sinai Hospital, didn’t agree. “All you need is a clamp, scalpel or a needle driver to cause great harm,” he said.

Indeed, the white paper pointed to many benefits of using the technology versus other surgical methods, including increased precision and accuracy of motion.

The general consensus was that the bar should not be set too high in terms of getting new RASDs to market. “It’s going to be interesting to see how new robotics will be judged,” said urologist Vipul Patel, MD, professor of Urology at the University of Central Florida College of Medicine.

Da Vinci was cleared by demonstrating substantial equivalence to laparoscopic devices. Patel wondered if getting new RASDs to market would be difficult if they had to prove substantial equivalence to da Vinci due to intellectual property and patent concerns. He expressed reservations about too many regulatory burdens impeding innovation: “That’s not good for us in the long term,” he said.

Data Collection

As part of the workshop, the FDA was interested in gathering input for approving indications for specific procedures and general use. The FDA generally considers new, specific indications to fall within the scope of the cleared general use, though they should be supported by additional preclinical, animal, literature or clinical data.

Myriam Curet, MD, a surgeon and chief medical officer at Intuitive, said that general indications don’t necessarily mean anything to healthcare professionals. She suggested a proposed paradigm through which a general indication could be supported by data on specific procedures most representative of the indication as a whole.

Steven Schwaitzberg, MD, professor and chair, department of surgery at University at Buffalo School of Medicine and Biomedical Science, said data collection may be necessary to support specific procedures, such as adding a pediatric indication.

To read the FDA’s white paper on the topic, visit: www.fdanews.com/072015-robots-surgery.pdf.
— Elizabeth Hollis

Regulatory Affairs

Upcoming Events

  • 10Mar

    FDA Drug GMP Facility Inspections During the Pandemic

  • 16Mar

    Pharmaceutical Naming Regulation: Understanding the Latest Developments

  • 18Mar

    Pharmaceutical Postmarket Surveillance: Latest Developments in the Era of COVID-19

  • 23Mar

    Data Integrity for GCP Professionals: Core Requirements, Expectations and Challenges

  • 30Mar

    Data Integrity for GMP/Postmarket Professionals: Core Requirements, Expectations and Challenges

  • 06Apr

    Medical Device Cybersecurity: Understand the Latest Developments

Featured Products

  • Biological Risk Evaluation and Management for Medical Devices

  • GMP Inspection Preparation Checklist: A Tool for Internal Auditing

Featured Stories

  • WhiteHouse.gif

    President Biden Issues Executive Order on U.S. Supply Chain

  • roche.gif

    Priority Healthcare Settles Diabetes Test Lawsuit with Roche for $43 Million

  • Effective text

    Pfizer/BioNTech Vaccine Equally Effective for All Age Groups, Israeli Study Says

  • Siemens Healthineers logo

    Siemens Healthineers’ COVID-19 Antigen Lab Test Receives CE Mark

The Revised ICH E8: A Guide to New Clinical Trial Requirements

Learn More
  • Drug Products
    • Quality
    • Regulatory Affairs
    • GMPs
    • Inspections and Audits
    • Postmarket Safety
    • Submissions and Approvals
    • Research and Development
    • Commercial Operations
  • Device Products
    • Quality
    • Regulatory Affairs
    • QSR
    • Inspections and Audits
    • Postmarket Safety
    • Submissions and Approvals
    • Research and Development
    • Commercial Operations
  • Clinical Products
    • Trial Design
    • Data Integrity
    • GCP
    • Inspections and Audits
    • Transparency
  • Privacy Policy
  • Do Not Sell My Personal Information
Footer Logo

300 N. Washington St., Suite 200, Falls Church, VA 22046, USA

Phone 703.538.7600 – Fax 703.538.7676 – Toll free 888.838.5578

Copyright © 2021. All Rights Reserved. Design, CMS, Hosting & Web Development :: ePublishing