COMMENTARY
Dangerous
Laxity on Medical Implant Safety
By Diana Zuckerman
October 14, 2002
The news about
the checkup on Vice President Dick Cheney's heart and pacemaker came just
as key congressional negotiators were meeting behind closed doors to craft
a law on all medical devices -- including Cheney's implant. It would be nice
if a new law gave all patients a free one-year checkup for their implants,
like Cheney's. Instead, the proposed law would make it easier for dangerous
implants to stay on the market.
In the year of Enron and WorldCom, the Food and Drug Administration is urging
Congress to give a free pass to medical device manufacturers that are too
busy to conduct long-term safety research on the implants they sell. Apparently,
medical device manufacturers are so honest that they don't need independent
oversight. Instead, the proposed law would speed up the approval of implants
and other lifesaving medical devices without any new protections to make sure
the heart valves and other implants were safe for long-term use.
Why worry? Although concerns about prescription drug prices, a possible war
with Iraq and other issues have dominated headlines, the last few months have
brought mind-boggling news stories questioning the safety of implants and
other medical devices.
Here are a few examples:
* U.S. News & World Report published a story saying gastric lap bands,
bladder slings, jaw joints and other implants had caused deaths and irrevocable
damage to thousands, many of whom wanted to lose weight or had relatively
minor health problems before surgery.
* In July, the FDA quietly held a meeting to discuss data collected over five
years on saline breast implants, which indicated that, on average, patients
suffered from several serious complications and many required at least two
additional surgeries during the first five years.
* In August, the Newark (N.J.) Star-Ledger reported that device manufacturers
had covered up patient deaths and severe adverse reactions instead of reporting
them to the FDA as required by law. And when companies finally reported them,
the FDA did nothing to penalize the companies for wrongdoing.
With so much attention on the cost of prescription drugs, few Americans have
been concerned about medical implants. Meanwhile, we are rapidly becoming
a nation of people with implanted parts. Who among us doesn't have a friend
or relative with an implant of some sort? My baby-boomer brother has a hip
replacement, my mother-in-law has new knees, a cousin's baby is relying on
a shunt and several friends have complications from the breast implants they
chose after mastectomies. I wonder how many of them have annual checkups for
their replacement parts the way our vice president does.
Many implants have been on the market since before 1976, when the FDA first
was given authority to regulate medical devices. Although they had been on
the market for years, heart valves, shunts, breast implants, jaw implants
and many other devices were approved by the FDA after only short-term studies
following patients for, in some cases, just a few weeks or months.
Even though patients will need these implants for the rest of their lives,
the FDA rarely requires studies to find out what happens five or 10 or 20
years later. Even worse, newly designed implants are sometimes approved based
on scanty data if the company convinces the FDA that the implants are "substantially
equivalent" to other previously approved implants.
It's not too late for Congress to listen to its own rhetoric about the need
for independent oversight of the business world and apply it to medical device
companies. If that doesn't happen, then patients and other buyers will just
have to beware. Perhaps instead of birthday and anniversary cards, we should
start sending friends and relatives annual reminders to get checkups on their
implants. If patients don't take matters into their own hands, we may never
find out whether these implants are safe until it is too late.
Diana Zuckerman is president of the National Center for Policy Research
for Women & Families, a nonprofit research-based organization in Washington,
D.C., that analyzes health policies. E-mail: dz@center4policy.org.
For
information about reprinting this article, go to http://www.lats.com/rights.