Search

The objective of this study is to describe application of the Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership (OMOP) common data model (CDM) to support medical device real-world evaluation in a National Evaluation System for health Technology Coordinating Center (NESTcc) Test-Case involving 2 healthcare systems, Mercy Health and Mayo Clinic. CDM implementation was coordinated across 2 healthcare systems with multiple hospitals to aggregate both medical device data from supply chain databases and patient outcomes and covariates from electronic health record data. Several data quality assurance (QA) analyses were implemented on the OMOP CDM to validate the data extraction, transformation, and load (ETL) process. OMOP CDM-based data of relevant patient encounters were successfully established to support studies for FDA regulatory submissions. QA analyses verified that the data transformation was robust between data sources and OMOP CDM. Our efforts provided useful insights in real-world data integration using OMOP CDM for medical device evaluation coordinated across multiple healthcare systems.

Stephen P Fortin,1 William Petraiuolo,2 Guy Cafri,1 Gustavo Scapini,3 Pratyush Agarwal,4 Divya Chakke,4 Stephen Johnston,1 Barbara H Johnson,1 Paul M Coplan,1,5 Shumin Zhang1 1MedTech Epidemiology and Real-World Data Science, Office of the Chief Medical Officer, Johnson & Johnson, New Brunswick, NJ, USA; 2Medical Affairs, Ethicon, Cincinnati, OH, USA; 3Regional Medical Affairs, Johnson & Johnson, São Paulo, Brazil; 4Mu Sigma, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India; 5University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, USACorrespondence: Stephen P Fortin, MedTech Epidemiology and Real-World Data Science, Office of the Chief Medical Officer, Johnson & Johnson, 410 George St, New Brunswick, NJ, USA, Tel +1 908 927 4844, Email sfortin1@its.jnj.comPurpose: Linear surgical staplers reduce rates of surgical adverse events (bleeding, leaks, infections) compared to manual sutures thereby reducing patient risks, surgeon workflow disruption, and healthcare costs. However, further improvements are needed. Ethicon Gripping Surface Technology (GST) reloads, tested and approved by regulatory authorities in combination with powered staplers, may reduce surgical risks through improved tissue grip. While manual staplers are used in some regions due to affordability, clinical data on GST reloads used with manual staplers are unavailable. This study compared surgical adverse event rates of manual staplers with GST vs standard reloads. These data may be used for label changes in China and Latin America.Patients and Methods: Patients undergoing general or thoracic surgery between October 1, 2015 and August 31, 2021 using ECHELON FLEX™ manual staplers with GST or standard reloads were identified from the Premier Healthcare Database. GST reloads were compared to standard reloads for non-inferiority in bleeding and anastomotic leak for general surgery. Secondary outcomes included sepsis for general surgery, and bleeding and prolonged air leak for thoracic surgery. Covariate balancing was performed using stable balancing weights.Results: The general and thoracic surgery cohorts contained 4571 (GST: 2780; standard: 1791) and 814 (GST: 514; standard: 300) patients, respectively. GST reloads were non-inferior to standard reloads for bleeding and anastomotic leak (adjusted cumulative incidence ratio: 1.02 [90% CI: 0.71, 1.45] and 1.03 [90% CI: 0.72, 1.46], respectively) for general surgery. Compared with standard reloads, GST reloads had a similar incidence of sepsis (2.2% vs 2.1%) for general surgery and lower incidences of bleeding (9.5% vs 16.0%) and prolonged air leak (12.6% vs 14.0%,) for thoracic surgery.Conclusion: GST reloads, compared to standard reloads, used with ECHELON FLEX™ manual staplers had comparable perioperative bleeding and anastomotic leak for general surgery, and lower incidences of safety events for thoracic surgery.Keywords: real-world evidence, safety, ECHELON, general surgery, thoracic surgery

In 2020, the European Commission up-classified metal cobalt as Class 1B Carcinogen (presumed to have carcinogenic potential) based primarily on data from rodent inhalation carcinogenicity studies. This up-classification requires an assessment under the Medical Device Regulations of cobalt cancer risk from medical devices. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate site-specific cancer risks with cobalt exposure from either total joint replacement (TJR) or occupational exposure (OC). Results were stratified by exposure type (OC or TJR), exposure level (metal-on-metal (MoM) or non-MoM), follow-up duration (latency period:5, 5-10 or10 years), and cancer incidence or mortality (detection bias assessment). From 30 studies (653,104 subjects, average 14.5 years follow-up), the association between TJR/OC and cancer risk was null for 22 of 27 cancer sites, negative for 3 sites, and positive for prostate cancer and myeloma. Significant heterogeneity and large estimate ranges were observed for many cancer sites. No significant increase in estimates was observed by exposure level or follow-up duration. The current evidence, including weak associations, heterogeneity across studies and no increased association with exposure level or follow-up duration, is insufficient to conclude that there exists an increased risk for people exposed to cobalt in TJR/OC of developing site-specific cancers.

The ThermoCool SmartTouch catheter (ablation catheter with contact force and 6-hole irrigation [CF-I6]) is approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation and used in routine clinical practice for persistent AF ablation, although clinical outcomes for this indication are unknown. There is a need to understand whether data from routine clinical practice can be used to conduct regulatory-grade evaluations and support label expansions.To use health system data to compare the safety and effectiveness of the CF-I6 catheter for persistent AF ablation with the ThermoCool SmartTouch SurroundFlow catheter (ablation catheter with contact force and 56-hole irrigation [CF-I56]), which is approved by the FDA for this indication.This retrospective, comparative-effectiveness cohort study included patients undergoing catheter ablation for persistent AF at Mercy Health or Mayo Clinic from January 1, 2014, to April 30, 2021, with up to a 1-year follow-up using electronic health record data.Use of the CF-I6 or CF-I56 catheter.The primary safety outcome was a composite of death, thromboembolic events, and procedural complications within 7 to 90 days. The exploratory effectiveness outcome was a composite of AF-related hospitalization events after a 90-day blanking period. Propensity score weighting was used to balance baseline covariates. Risk differences were estimated between catheter groups and averaged across the 2 health care systems, testing for noninferiority of the CF-I6 vs the CF-I56 catheter with respect to the safety outcome using 2-sided 90% CIs.Overall, 1450 patients (1034 [71.3%] male; 1397 [96.3%] White) underwent catheter ablation for persistent AF, including 949 at Mercy Health (186 CF-I6 and 763 CF-I56; mean [SD] age, 64.9 [9.2] years) and 501 at Mayo Clinic (337 CF-I6 and 164 CF-I56; mean [SD] age, 63.7 [9.5] years). A total of 798 (55.0%) had been treated with class I or III antiarrhythmic drugs before ablation. The safety outcome (CF-I6 - CF-I56) was similar at both Mercy Health (1.3%; 90% CI, -2.1% to 4.6%) and Mayo Clinic (-3.8%; 90% CI, -11.4% to 3.7%); the mean difference was noninferior, with a mean of 0.5% (90% CI, -2.6% to 3.5%; P .001). The effectiveness was similar at 12 months between the 2 catheter groups (mean risk difference, -1.8%; 90% CI, -7.3% to 3.7%).In this cohort study, the CF-I6 catheter met the prespecified noninferiority safety criterion for persistent AF ablation compared with the CF-I56 catheter, and effectiveness was similar. This study demonstrates the ability of electronic health care system data to enable safety and effectiveness evaluations of medical devices.

The purpose of this study is to assess positive predictive value (PPV), relative to medical chart review, of International Classification of Diseases (ICD)-9/10 diagnostic codes for identifying opioid overdoses and poisonings.Data were obtained from Kaiser Permanente Northwest and Northern California. Diagnostic data from electronic health records, submitted claims, and state death records from Oregon, Washington, and California were linked. Individual opioid-related poisoning codes (e.g., 965.xx and X42), and adverse effects of opioids codes (e.g., E935.xx) combined with diagnoses possibly indicative of overdoses (e.g., respiratory depression), were evaluated by comparison with chart audits.Opioid adverse effects codes had low PPV to detect overdoses (13.4%) as assessed in 127 charts and were not pursued. Instead, opioid poisoning codes were assessed in 2100 individuals who had those codes present in electronic health records in the period between the years 2008 and 2012. Of these, 10/2100 had no available information and 241/2100 were excluded potentially as anesthesia-related. Among the 1849 remaining individuals with opioid poisoning codes, 1495 events were accurately identified as opioid overdoses; 69 were miscodes or misidentified, and 285 were opioid adverse effects, not overdoses. Thus, PPV was 81%. Opioid adverse effects or overdoses were accurately identified in 1780 of 1849 events (96.3%).Opioid poisoning codes have a predictive value of 81% to identify opioid overdoses, suggesting ICD opioid poisoning codes can be used to monitor overdose rates and evaluate interventions to reduce overdose. Further research to assess sensitivity, specificity, and negative predictive value are ongoing. Copyright © 2017 John WileySons, Ltd.