[Barriers to clinical studies involving medical devices]

Specific barriers to the conduct of randomised clinical trials on medical devices

BACKGROUND

Medical devices play an important role in the diagnosis, prevention, treatment and care of diseases. However, compared to pharmaceuticals, there is no rigorous formal regulation for demonstration of benefits and exclusion of harms to patients. The medical device industry argues that the classical evidence hierarchy cannot be applied for medical devices, as randomised clinical trials are impossible to perform. This article aims to identify the barriers for randomised clinical trials on medical devices.

METHODS

Systematic literature searches without meta-analysis and internal European Clinical Research Infrastructure Network (ECRIN) communications taking place during face-to-face meetings and telephone conferences from 2013 to 2017 within the context of the ECRIN Integrating Activity (ECRIN-IA) project.

RESULTS

In addition to the barriers that exist for all trials, we identified three major barriers for randomised clinical trials on medical devices, namely: (1) randomisation, including timing of assessment, acceptability, blinding, choice of the comparator group and considerations on the learning curve; (2) difficulties in determining appropriate outcomes; and (3) the lack of scientific advice, regulations and transparency.

CONCLUSIONS

The present review offers potential solutions to break down the barriers identified, and argues for applying the randomised clinical trial design when assessing the benefits and harms of medical devices.

OpenHELP (Heidelberg laparoscopy phantom): development of an open-source surgical evaluation and training tool

Background

Apart from animal testing and clinical trials, surgical research and laparoscopic training mainly rely on phantoms. The aim of this project was to design a phantom with realistic anatomy and haptic characteristics, modular design and easy reproducibility. The phantom was named open-source Heidelberg laparoscopic phantom (OpenHELP) and serves as an open-source platform.

Methods

The phantom was based on an anonymized CT scan of a male patient. The anatomical structures were segmented to obtain digital three-dimensional models of the torso and the organs. The digital models were materialized via rapid prototyping. One flexible, using an elastic abdominal wall, and one rigid method, using a plastic shell, to simulate pneumoperitoneum were developed. Artificial organ production was carried out sequentially starting from raw gypsum models to silicone molds to final silicone casts. The reproduction accuracy was exemplarily evaluated for ten silicone rectum models by comparing the digital 3D surface of the original rectum with CT scan by calculating the root mean square error of surface variations. Haptic realism was also evaluated to find the most realistic silicone compositions on a visual analog scale (VAS, 0–10).

Results

The rigid and durable plastic torso and soft silicone organs of the abdominal cavity were successfully produced. A simulation of pneumoperitoneum could be created successfully by both methods. The reproduction accuracy of ten silicone rectum models showed an average root mean square error of 2.26 (0–11.48) mm. Haptic realism revealed an average value on a VAS of 7.25 (5.2–9.6) for the most realistic rectum.

Conclusion

The OpenHELP phantom proved to be feasible and accurate. The phantom was consecutively applied frequently in the field of computer-assisted surgery at our institutions and is accessible as an open-source project at www.open-cas.org for the academic community.