FDA/CDC

FDA panel tackles mesh for anterior repair of POP


 

Patient-reported outcomes should be the priority consideration for determining whether the three synthetic mesh devices currently available for transvaginal repair of pelvic organ prolapse (POP) in the anterior vaginal compartment should remain on the market, according to the Food and Drug Administration Obstetrics and Gynecology Devices panel.

Dr. Cheryl Iglesia

Dr. Cheryl Iglesia

The panel was convened in February 2019 to advise the Food and Drug Administration on how it should evaluate the safety and effectiveness of the three currently marketed devices – each of which has ongoing postmarket surveillance studies – as well as any other similar devices that come up for premarket approval in the future.

The panel’s main messages: Subjective outcomes are what really matter – even more so than anatomic or objective outcomes – as does long-term follow-up.

The panel generally believes that both anatomic/objective and subjective outcomes should be used” to assess the effectiveness of mesh repair, “compared to native tissue repair,” said panel chair Keith Isaacson, MD, medical director of the Newton-Wellesley Hospital in Newton, Mass. “But we feel that, if we had to score [each category of outcome], about 75% should be subjective.”

The three devices currently marketed for transvaginal repair of POP (Boston Scientific’s Uphold LITE and Xenform, as well as Coloplast’s Restorelle DirectFix Anterior) are being scrutinized under a new regulatory paradigm and amid a charged backdrop of safety warnings and years of lawsuits regarding debilitating complications following surgeries that involved the implantation of synthetic vaginal mesh.

The two manufacturers of the currently available devices launched postmarket surveillance studies, called 522 studies, after the FDA issued postmarket surveillance study orders in 2012 to all manufacturers of surgical mesh for transvaginal repair of POP. (Most companies chose at the time to pull their products from the market.) This FDA action, along with a reclassification of the devices from class II to the high-risk class III, had been recommended at a 2011 meeting of the Obstetrics and Gynecology Devices panel.

In anticipation of a future reclassification, the 522 studies were designed at the time to support future premarket approval (PMA) applications, as advised by the FDA. Now, as a result of the 2016 reclassification of surgical mesh for transvaginal POP repair to class III – and the companies’ subsequent PMA applications – the FDA is reviewing the ongoing postmarket study results with a PMA lens to determine each device’s benefit/risk profile.

It’s a challenging assessment to make, FDA officials said.

The agency reported to the panel that a search of medical device reports from 2008 to 2018 identified 11,274 adverse events associated with mesh placed in the anterior vaginal compartment to treat POP. These included 10,391 reports of serious injury, 806 reports of device malfunctions, and 77 reports of death.

Next Article: