Obstacles to Studying Emerging Technologies

Abstract

Laparoscopic radiofrequency ablation of uterine leiomyomas with a new Federal Drug Administration (FDA)-approved device, a device that delivers radiofrequency energy, is a novel procedure that aims to meet patient and physician demand for effective, minimally invasive leiomyoma treatment. However, as a new procedure, the durability of symptom relief, the safety in widespread use, and ultimately the comparative effectiveness of radiofrequency ablation of leiomyomas need further study. In June 2013, the University of California Fibroid Network, a collaboration of the five University of California Departments of Obstetrics and Gynecology, launched the Uterine Leiomyoma Treatment with Radiofrequency Ablation Study, an investigator-initiated early postmarket approval clinical trial of radiofrequency ablation of leiomyomas. In this commentary, we provide a review of the FDA approval process for medical devices using the device that delivers radiofrequency energy as a case study and describe significant limitations of this process that may adversely affect clinical care. We show how the deficiencies in the FDA process have challenged our ability to conduct independent early postmarket research evaluating the safety and long-term effectiveness of this novel technology. Our experience validates the Institute of Medicine's recommendation that advancements in surgical technology introducing new treatments without long-term effectiveness data, comparative study, or both should emerge onto the market under research conditions. Until the FDA requires more rigorous study of novel devices, we suggest ways of working together as a community of gynecologic surgeons to evaluate promising new technologies in early postmarket studies, putting research before widespread adoption of surgical innovation.