Determining the value of the abdominal core health quality collaborative to support regulatory decisions.

ACHQC Hernia Post-market surveillance Regulatory

Journal

Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery
ISSN: 1248-9204
Titre abrégé: Hernia
Pays: France
ID NLM: 9715168

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
29 Apr 2024
Historique:
received: 26 09 2023
accepted: 09 02 2024
medline: 29 4 2024
pubmed: 29 4 2024
entrez: 29 4 2024
Statut: aheadofprint

Résumé

The study objective is to document value created by real-world evidence from the Abdominal Core Health Quality Collaborative (ACHQC) for regulatory decisions. The ACHQC is a national effort that generates data on hernia repair techniques and devices. Two retrospective cohort evaluations compared cost and time of ACHQC analyses to traditional postmarket studies. The first analysis was based on 25 reports submitted to the European Medicines Agency of 20 mesh products for post-market surveillance. A second analysis supported label expansion submitted to the Food and Drug Administration, Center for Devices and Radiological Health for a robotic-assisted surgery device to include ventral hernia repair. Estimated costs of counterfactual studies, defined as studies that might have been done if the registry had not been available, were derived from a model described in the literature. Return on investment, percentage of cost savings, and time savings were calculated. 45,010 patients contributed to the two analyses. The cost and time differences between individual 25 ACHQC analyses (41,112 patients) and traditional studies ranged from $1.3 to $2.2 million and from 3 to 4.8 years, both favoring use of the ACHQC. In the second label expansion analysis (3,898 patients), the estimated return on investment ranged from 11 to 461% with time savings of 5.1 years favoring use of the ACHQC. Compared to traditional postmarket studies, use of ACHQC data can result in cost and time savings when used for appropriate regulatory decisions in light of key assumptions.

Identifiants

pubmed: 38683481
doi: 10.1007/s10029-024-02990-5
pii: 10.1007/s10029-024-02990-5
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Informations de copyright

© 2024. The Author(s).

Références

Garcia DPC, Santos C, Hubner PN et al (2016) Treatment of abdominal wall hernia with suture, or polypropylene, or collagen prosthesis. Acta Cir Bras 31:371–376. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0102-865020160060000002
doi: 10.1590/S0102-865020160060000002 pubmed: 27355743
Lermite E, Arnaud J-P (2012) Prospective randomized study comparing quality of life after shoudice or mesh plug repair for inguinal hernia: short-term results. Surg Technol Int 22:101–106
pubmed: 23023573
Kanitra JJ, Hess AL, Haan PS et al (2019) Hernia recurrence and infection rate in elective complex abdominal wall repair using biologic mesh. BMC Surg 19:174. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12893-019-0640-3
doi: 10.1186/s12893-019-0640-3 pubmed: 31752803 pmcid: 6873664
Kummerow Broman K, Huang L-C, Faqih A et al (2017) Hidden morbidity of ventral hernia repair with mesh: as concerning as common bile duct injury? J Am Coll Surg 224:35–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2016.09.016
doi: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2016.09.016 pubmed: 27725219
Poulose BK (2018) So what’s the chance of this mesh causing me a problem in the long run? Ann Surg 267:e66. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000002681
doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000002681 pubmed: 29334557
Hooper MA, Renshaw SM, Poulose BK (2022) Patient perspectives on mesh-related complications after hernia repair. Surg 171:994–999. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surg.2021.09.022
doi: 10.1016/j.surg.2021.09.022
Reynolds IS, Rising JP, Coukell AJ et al (2014) Assessing the safety and effectiveness of devices after US food and drug administration approval: FDA-mandated postapproval studies. JAMA Intern Med 174:1773–1779. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamainternmed.2014.4194
doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2014.4194 pubmed: 25265209
Gibbons RD, Amatya AK, Brown CH et al (2010) Post-approval drug safety surveillance. Annu Rev Public Health 31:419–437. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.publhealth.012809.103649
doi: 10.1146/annurev.publhealth.012809.103649 pubmed: 20070192 pmcid: 2841706
Majety RPD (2021) New era in medical device regulations in the european union. Pharm Reg Aff 10:2
Examples of Real-World Evidence (RWE) Used in Medical Device Regulatory Decisions. https://www.fda.gov/media/146258/download?attachment . Accessed 10 Dec 2023
Köckerling F, Simon T, Hukauf M et al (2018) The importance of registries in the postmarketing surveillance of surgical meshes. Ann Surg 268:1097–1104. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000002326
doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000002326 pubmed: 28594740
Rayner AM, Shuren J, Gross TP, Marinac-Dabic D (2012) Strengthening our national system for medical device post-market surveillance. https://www.fda.gov/downloads/AboutFDA/CentersOffices/OfficeofMedicalProductsandTobacco/CDRH/CDRHReports/UCM301924.pdf . Accessed 10 Dec 2023
(2013) U.S. food & drug administration, center for devices and radiological health. strengthening our national system for medical device post-market surveillance: update and next steps. https://www.fda.gov/files/about%20fda/published/Strengthening-Our-National-System-for-Medical-Device-Postmarket-Surveillance.pdf . Accessed 10 Dec 2023
Prabhu AS, Poulose BK, Rosen MJ (2020) Harnessing the power of collaboration for postmarket surveillance of hernia mesh devices. Ann Surg 271:221–222. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000003437
doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000003437 pubmed: 31290762
Simon GE, Platt R, Watanabe JH et al (2022) When can we rely on real-world evidence to evaluate new medical treatments? Clin Pharmacol Ther 111:30–34. https://doi.org/10.1002/cpt.2253
doi: 10.1002/cpt.2253 pubmed: 33895994
Krucoff MW, Normand SL, Edwards FH, et al Recommendations for a national medical device evaluation system: strategically coordinated registry networks to bridge clinical care and research. https://www.mdepinet.org/wp-content/uploads/Recommendations-for-a-National-Medical-Device-Evaluation-System_24-Aug-2015.pdf . Accessed 10 Dec 2023
Poulose BK, Roll S, Murphy JW et al (2016) Design and implementation of the americas hernia society quality collaborative (ahsqc): improving value in hernia care. Hernia 20:177–189. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10029-016-1477-7
doi: 10.1007/s10029-016-1477-7 pubmed: 26936373
Abdominal Core Health Quality Collaborative. About Us. https://achqc.org/faqs . Accessed 10 Dec 2023
Poulose BK, Schwartzman H, Huang LC et al (2021) Multistakeholder collaborative effort to enhance long-term follow-up in the abdominal core health quality collaborative. Ann Surg Open 2:e052. https://doi.org/10.1097/AS9.0000000000000052
doi: 10.1097/AS9.0000000000000052 pubmed: 37638249 pmcid: 10455236
United States Food and Drug Administration. 510(K) Premarket Notification: K173585. https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfpmn/pmn.cfm?ID=K173585 . Accessed 10 Dec 2023
Wimmer NJ, Robbins S, Ssemaganda H, et al (2016) Assessing the cost burden of United States FDA-mandated post-approval studies for medical devices. J Health Care Finance 2016: http://www.healthfinancejournal.com/~junland/index.php/johcf/article/view/82/83 . Accessed 10 Dec 2023
Pappas G, Berlin J, Avila-Tang E et al (2019) Determining value of coordinated registry networks (CRNs): a case of transcatheter valve therapies. BMJ Surg Interv Health Technol 1:e000003. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjsit-2019-000003
doi: 10.1136/bmjsit-2019-000003 pubmed: 35047771 pmcid: 8749335
Cronenwett JL, Avila-Tang E, Beck AW et al (2020) Use of data from the vascular quality initiative registry to support regulatory decisions yielded a high return on investment. BMJ Surg Interv Health Technol 2:e000039. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjsit-2020-000039
doi: 10.1136/bmjsit-2020-000039 pubmed: 35051256 pmcid: 8749325
Van Norman GA (2016) Drugs, devices, and the FDA: part 1: an overview of approval processes for drugs. JACC Basic Transl Sci 1:170–179. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacbts.2016.03.002
doi: 10.1016/j.jacbts.2016.03.002 pubmed: 30167510 pmcid: 6113160
Sedrakyan A, Marinac-Dabic D, Campbell B et al (2022) Advancing the real-world evidence for medical devices through coordinated registry networks. BMJ Surg Interv Health Technol 4:e000123. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjsit-2021-000123
doi: 10.1136/bmjsit-2021-000123 pubmed: 36393894 pmcid: 9660584

Auteurs

B K Poulose (BK)

Center for Abdominal Core Health, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH, USA. benjamin.poulose@osumc.edu.

E Avila-Tang (E)

United States Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, MD, USA.

H Schwartzman (H)

Abdominal Core Health Quality Collaborative Foundation, Centennial, CO, USA.

T Bisgaard (T)

Surgical Department, Zealand University Hospital, Køge, Roskilde, Denmark.

L N Jørgensen (LN)

Digestive Disease Center, Bispebjerg Hospital, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.

G Gibeily (G)

United States Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, MD, USA.

A Schick (A)

United States Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, MD, USA.

D Marinac-Dabic (D)

United States Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, MD, USA.

M J Rosen (MJ)

Center for Abdominal Core Health, The Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA.

G Pappas (G)

United States Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, MD, USA.

Classifications MeSH