Skip to content

Menu

LexBlog, Inc. logo
NetworkSub-MenuBrowse by SubjectBrowse by PublisherJoin the NetworkGet StartedSubscribeSupportContact
Search
Close

New Bill Could Restrict Medical Device Approval Process

By Stefanie Colella-Walsh on February 21, 2012
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn

A recent Bloomberg article, reported that House Democrat Edward Markey (MA) has sponsored a bill that would prevent manufacturers from asserting that their new medical devices are “substantially equivalent” to existing, approved devices, under certain circumstances.  While the bill was apparently developed as a result of a 1999 recall of vaginal mesh manufactured by Boston Scientific, it is particularly relevant given the recent litigation over the 2010 recall of the DePuy Orthopaedics’ ASR hip replacement devices.

The ASR device was approved for U.S. marketing through the 510(k) premarket approval process, which permits the manufacturers to claim their new products are “substantially equivalent” to preexisting ones.  If successful, the manufacturers are able to avoid exposing their devices to more thorough clinical trials, which can often take years and can further delay introduction to the market.  However, many times, the immediately preexisting device was also approved in the same manner, so that the lineage originates at an old, untested device.

The new bill would allow the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to deny a manufacturers ability to claim its device is “substantially equivalent” to a preexisting device if the preexisting device was recalled or if the FDA was in the process of deciding to remove it.  The manufacturers would also be required to demonstrate the difference between their new device and the problematic device as well as advise Congress if any device in the product’s lineage had been recalled.

In support of the bill, Representative Markey commented, “If an automobile is recalled for a major safety problem, we wouldn’t allow future models to repeat this same flaw, and the same should be true for the medical devices used in our bodies.”  He further opined that the bill ensures “that devices do not mimic the mistakes made by other products.”

At this time, it is unclear whether the bill will garner the necessary support of Congress and President Obama to become law.

If you have had a hip replacement, which used the DePuy ASR or Pinnacle devices, you can contact Stark & Stark and speak to one of the Mass Tort attorneys, free of charge, who can help assess any claims that you might have against the DePuy manufacturers.

Photo of Stefanie Colella-Walsh Stefanie Colella-Walsh

Stefanie Colella-Walsh is a Shareholder and member of Stark & Stark’s Litigation, Insurance Coverage & Liability, Intellectual Property and Mass Torts Groups where she concentrates her practice in complex litigation with a focus in mass tort and pharmaceutical litigation. She is currently involved…

Stefanie Colella-Walsh is a Shareholder and member of Stark & Stark’s Litigation, Insurance Coverage & Liability, Intellectual Property and Mass Torts Groups where she concentrates her practice in complex litigation with a focus in mass tort and pharmaceutical litigation. She is currently involved in representing numerous plaintiffs in federal and state environmental and pharmaceutical mass tort cases, as well as state and federal class action litigations based upon commercial, employment, civil rights, investments/securities and consumer fraud claims. Ms. Colella-Walsh frequently writes about timely legal and legislative developments impacting plaintiffs in mass tort and product liability actions for Stark & Stark’s Mass Tort Law Blog.

Read more about Stefanie Colella-WalshEmail
Show more Show less
  • Posted in:
    Health Care and Life Sciences
  • Blog:
    Mass Torts Law Blog
  • Organization:
    Stark & Stark

Call us at 1-800-913-0988 or email sales@lexblog.com.

Facebook LinkedIn Twitter RSS
The Library at LexBlog
  • About LexBlog
  • The Field We Built
  • Library at LexBlog
  • Our Beliefs
  • Our Team
  • Contact LexBlog
  • Disclaimer
  • Editorial Policy
  • Terms of Service
  • Get Started
  • Publishing Solutions
  • Compass
  • Submit a Request
  • Support Center
  • System Status
Copyright © 2026, LexBlog, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Law blog design & platform by LexBlog LexBlog Logo