MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387032994 · doi:10.1177/15266028231202718

Insights From the FDA’s MAUDE Database Regarding the Real-World Safety of Jetstream Atherectomy for Peripheral Arterial Disease

2023· article· en· W4387032994 on OpenAlexaff
Adam Min, Fahd Alkhalifa, Aida Ahrari, Gerard M. Healy, Arash Jaberi, Kong Teng Tan, Sebastian Mafeld

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Endovascular Therapy · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPeripheral Artery Disease Management
Canadian institutionsToronto General HospitalUniversity Health NetworkUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineArterial diseaseAtherectomyPeripheralDiseaseInternal medicineCardiologyVascular diseaseStent

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Rotational atherectomy has shown promise as an adjunctive therapy to percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTA) and stenting for the treatment of peripheral arterial disease (PAD). However, published data regarding the safety of these devices are limited. The Food and Drug Administration Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience (MAUDE) database collects reports of adverse event for medical devices. We present 3 years of MAUDE adverse events data for the Jetstream Atherectomy System (Boston Scientific) for the treatment of PAD. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We searched MAUDE from January 1, 2019 to December 31, 2021. Duplicate reports and those with insufficient information were excluded, leaving a total of 500 reports for analysis. Adverse events were categorized as either patient complication, device malfunction, or both. Adverse events were classified using the Cardiovascular and Interventional Radiological Society of Europe's (CIRSE) classification system for adverse events. RESULTS: The most common patient complications were embolism (22; 4.4%), dissection (17; 3.4%), vessel perforation (12; 2.4%), and device fracture in the patient (6; 1.2%). The most common modes of device failure were entrapment of the device on the guidewire (134; 27%), loss of blade rotation (116; 23%), loss of aspiration (99; 20%), and mechanical damage (57; 11%). As per the CIRSE adverse events classification, most events had no post-procedural sequelae (475; 95%), followed by those requiring prolonged observation (14; 2.8%), and post-procedural therapy without long-term sequelae (10; 2.0%). One hundred six devices (21%) were returned for manufacturer analysis. CONCLUSION: We highlight important adverse events encountered in real-world practice with the Jetstream Atherectomy System. This analysis provides further understanding of the safety profile and modes of failure of Jetstream, and could help guide improvements in product design and manufacturer-user training. There is greater need for root-cause analysis that can aided by returning devices to the manufacturer.Clinical ImpactWe highlight important adverse events encountered in real-world practice with the Jetstream Atherectomy System. The MAUDE database is useful for capturing and characterizing modes of device failure/malfunction not typically described in conventional clinical studies. This may provide valuable information to help guide improvements in product design and manufacturer-user training. This information could also potentially be useful in helping establish manufacturer and product liability in the setting of medicolegal claims. We hope that by contributing to the growing understanding of the safety profile of the Jetstream Atherectomy System, our study may help physicians and patients come to more informed decisions regarding treatment options for PAD.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.030
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.177
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.159

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0300.177
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0150.017
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.032
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.260 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations8
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Endovascular TherapySame topicPeripheral Artery Disease ManagementFrench-language works237,207