FDA reclassifies blood separator and issues special controls
Device Regulation Alert: Safety, Compliance and Reimbursement News, December 10, 2007
The FDA has reclassified automated blood cell separator device operating on a centrifugal separation principle to Class II. The classification applies when the device is used for routine collection of blood and blood components.
The device operates by drawing blood from a donor, separating the whole blood into blood components, collecting one component and sending the remaining blood and blood components back to the donor. The components removed are used for transfusion or further manufacture.
All other uses of the device (e.g. therapeutic apheresis) remain classified in Class III.
In connection with this reclassification, the FDA also issued special control guidance intended to address adverse events that aren't required to be reported under the Medical Device Reporting regulation. The guidance can also be applied to the automated blood cell separator devices operating on a filtration separation principle.
After the December 31, 2007 effective date of the reclassification rule, device manufacturers submitting premarket notification (510k) for such a device must follow the guidance or otherwise demonstrate the device's safety and effectiveness.
The guidance identifies the risks of the device including blood loss, toxic reaction to anticoagulant used, damage to red blood cells, infection, and embolism.
The guidance instructs manufacturers of currently marketed products that don't have premarket approval to file an annual report for three years on the date of the reclassification to Class II or the date of the premarket notification (510k) clearance. The following information should be included in the annual report:
- Information about adverse events that were not required to be reported.
- Description of any change to the device that requires premarket notification
- Description of change to a class III device on the market before 1976 amendments to the classifications, that requires 30-day notice under 21 CFR 814.39(f).
The guidance notes the FDA hopes to find clusters of adverse events that could indicate a safety issue with the device that wouldn't be uncovered otherwise because the events weren't reported under MDR.
Click here to access the guidance. Click here to read the final rule reclassifying the device in the November 30 Federal Register.
Related Products
Most Popular
- Articles
-
- Q/A: Volume requirement for reporting hydration services
- Featured blog post: Nurses face felony charges after reporting physician to the Texas Medical Board
- Catch up on what's new with injections and infusions
- Topic: CMS, OESS post new security compliance review information, checklist
- Capturing all necessary codes for IUD insertion and removal can be challenging
- What does case-mix index mean to you?
- QA:Coding multiple initial infusions
- News and briefs: Oklahoma Osteopathic Association against residency bill change
- HIPAA Q&A: Level of encryption needed for email
- OB services: Coding inside and outside of the package
- E-mailed
-
- Q/A: Volume requirement for reporting hydration services
- Featured blog post: Nurses face felony charges after reporting physician to the Texas Medical Board
- Catch up on what's new with injections and infusions
- New conflicts of interest create new challenges
- Q/A. One injection code or two?
- What does case-mix index mean to you?
- ED-to-inpatient transfers are flawed with safety gaps
- Joint Commission Center announces handoff communication solutions
- Inside best practice: Reduce patient falls with a stoplight
- Identify modifiable risk factors to prevent patient falls
- Searched
