Preclinical testing for aortic endovascular grafts: Results of a Food and Drug Administration workshop

12Citations
Citations of this article
28Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Background: Since their introduction into clinical trials in the United States, endovascular aortic grafts have shown various types of problems. Although details of design and construction vary between different endovascular grafts and failure modes have had a variety of causes and clinical effects, the inability of preclinical testing to predict these failures remains common to all endovascular grafts. The need to improve preclinical testing in an attempt to reduce clinical device failures resulted in a Food and Drug Administration- sponsored workshop on endovascular graft preclinical testing held in Rockville, Md, from July 31 to August 1, 2001. Format: The workshop was not designed as a consensus conference. Instead, it provided a forum for bringing stakeholders together to define problems and identify areas of agreement and disagreement. The workshop had 34 invited participants who represented device manufacturers, the medical community, the Food and Drug Administration, and testing facilities, and international attendance was more than 120 people. Outcome: Discussion centered on: 1, defining the physiologic, anatomic, and morphologic characteristics of abdominal aortic aneurysms before and after endovascular graft treatment; 2, identifying the types of failures that have been observed clinically; and 3, determining which characteristics should be considered during preclinical modeling to better predict clinical performance. Attendees agreed to the need to better define and address anatomic characteristics and changes in the aneurysm after endograft treatment to optimize preclinical testing. Much discussion and little agreement occurred on the importance of flow-related forces on graft performance or the need or ability to define and model physiologic compliance during durability testing. The discussion and conclusions are summarized in this paper and are provided in detail at: http://www.fda.gov/cdrh/meetings/073101workshop.html. Conclusion: The workshop raised awareness of significant performance issues and the challenges of modeling the extremely variable and relatively undefined environment of abdominal aortic aneurysms. Through the interactive format of the workshop, participants identified areas of preclinical testing, device design, and aspects of the simulated environment that need further consideration.

References Powered by Scopus

Transfemoral Intraluminal Graft Implantation for Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms

3142Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Results of an aortic endograft trial: Impact of device failure beyond 12 months

183Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Longitudinal aneurysm shrinkage following endovascular aortic aneurysm repair: A source of intermediate and late complications

158Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cited by Powered by Scopus

In vivo deformation of the human abdominal aorta and common iliac arteries with hip and knee flexion: Implications for the design of stent-grafts

34Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Reporting standards for adverse events after medical device use in the peripheral vascular system

31Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Evolution and future of preclinical testing for endovascular grafts

23Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Abel, D. B., Beebe, H. G., Dedashtian, M. M., Morton, M. C., Moynahan, M., Smith, L. J., & Weinberg, S. L. (2002). Preclinical testing for aortic endovascular grafts: Results of a Food and Drug Administration workshop. Journal of Vascular Surgery, 35(5), 1022–1028. https://doi.org/10.1067/mva.2002.123762

Readers over time

‘12‘13‘14‘15‘16‘17‘18‘19‘20‘21‘2302468

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 13

57%

Researcher 8

35%

Professor / Associate Prof. 2

9%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Medicine and Dentistry 11

58%

Engineering 3

16%

Business, Management and Accounting 3

16%

Decision Sciences 2

11%

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free
0