Much of U.S. patent law jurisprudence still revolves around subject matter eligibility, but a new decision by the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit revisits the question of what constitutes obviousness in patent applications. The court remanded the case between Irvine, Calif.-based Axonics Inc. and Dublin-based Medtronic plc to the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) after determining that the PTAB judge’s understanding of obviousness is “doubly infected by error” in a decision that seems to offer some much-needed clarity where obviousness is concerned.
The U.S. FDA reported July 11 a class I recall for patient return electrodes used during electrosurgical procedures that may burn the patient with sufficient severity to induce a third-degree burn. More than 21,000 of the electrodes, made by Raritan, N.J.-based Ethicon Inc.’s Megadyne division, are subject to the recall, although the agency said the manufacturer is still conducting a root cause analysis of the issue.
Five long years after the publication of the now-notorious Katsanos paper, the U.S. FDA has issued a final determination about whether devices indicated for treatment of peripheral artery disease carry the threat of excess mortality when using paclitaxel as an antiproliferative.
The U.S. FDA’s draft guidance for patient-matched guides for orthopedic surgical implants is presumably a much-needed document for makers of these guides, and bench testing may suffice for many such applications. However, the draft states that clinical testing may be required when a manufacturer intends to claim that their guides could reduce surgical times.
Device makers are often cited in U.S. FDA warning letters for making claims not seen in the approved labeling, but the authors of a recent review of artificial intelligence (AI) products cleared by the FDA suggest that FDA documents and marketing materials should disclose the presence of AI in these products. The authors of an article in the Journal of the American Medical Association said that only about 80.6% of the products were represented with accurate statements about the presence of AI, although FDA regulation does not require that marketing materials make such disclosures.
The U.S. FDA’s draft guidance for predetermined change control plans (PCCP) is a groundbreaking document for med-tech regulation, but stakeholders see a few holes in the draft version. One of the issues for device manufacturers is that the guidance seems to exclude any possibility of inclusion of a new intended use or indication for use in a PCCP, while others seek more detail on how this policy can be applied to the device component of a combination product, two elements that may prove complicated to address in the final guidance.
The U.S. CMS posted a draft rule for home health payments for calendar year 2024, but the agency is not out of the woods yet with the established rule for CY 2023. The National Association for Homecare & Hospice (NAHC) announced July 6 that it has filed a lawsuit in the District Court for the District of Columbia seeking a reversal of rate cuts imposed by the agency for 2023, the results of which could spill over into the current round of rulemaking for home health payments.
The U.S. FDA’s draft guidance for predetermined change control plans (PCCP) is a groundbreaking document for med-tech regulation, but stakeholders see a few holes in the draft version. One of the issues for device manufacturers is that the guidance seems to exclude any possibility of inclusion of a new intended use or indication for use in a PCCP, while others seek more detail on how this policy can be applied to the device component of a combination product, two elements that may prove complicated to address in the final guidance.
The U.K. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) released several draft and final health technology assessments on July 5, including a review of the use of artificial intelligence (AI) to aid in the detection of lung nodules in CT images. The agency said that more research is needed before it will be able to provide an unqualified endorsement because of a relative lack of data that could be reliably generalized from clinical study subjects to the broader U.K. population at large.
Leadless cardiac electrophysiology devices have been around for a while now, but Abbott Laboratories of Abbott Park, Ill., has managed to beat the competition in the market for dual chamber pacing via two leadless devices. The company reported July 5 that the U.S. FDA has approved the Aveir DR, a two-unit device configuration that provides pacing for both the right ventricle and the right atrium and which some analysts believe helps to make Abbott shares an underappreciated asset for investors.
