98-20308. Medical Devices; Neurological Devices; Classification of Cranial Orthosis  

  • [Federal Register Volume 63, Number 146 (Thursday, July 30, 1998)]
    [Rules and Regulations]
    [Pages 40650-40652]
    From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
    [FR Doc No: 98-20308]
    
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
    
    Food and Drug Administration
    
    21 CFR Part 882
    
    [Docket No. 98N-0513]
    
    
    Medical Devices; Neurological Devices; Classification of Cranial 
    Orthosis
    
    AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.
    
    ACTION: Final rule.
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is classifying the 
    cranial orthosis into class II (special controls). The special controls 
    that will apply to the cranial orthosis are restriction to prescription 
    use, biocompatibility testing, and certain labeling requirements. The 
    agency is taking this action in response to a petition submitted under 
    the Federal, Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the act) as amended by the 
    Medical Device Amendments of 1976, the Safe Medical Devices Act of 
    1990, and the Food and Drug Administration Modernization Act of 1997. 
    The agency is classifying cranial orthosis into class II (special 
    controls) in order to provide a reasonable assurance of safety and 
    effectiveness of the device.
    
    EFFECTIVE DATE: August 31, 1998.
    
    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: James E. Dillard, Center for Devices 
    and Radiological Health (HFZ-410), Food and Drug Administration, 9200 
    Corporate Blvd., Rockville, MD 20850, 301-594-1184.
    
    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    
    I. Background
    
        In accordance with section 513(f)(1) of the act (21 U.S.C. 
    360c(f)(1)), devices that were not in commercial distribution before 
    May 28, 1976, the date of enactment of the Medical Device Amendments of 
    1976 (the amendments), generally referred to as postamendments devices, 
    are classified automatically by statute into class III without any FDA 
    rulemaking process. These devices remain in class III and require 
    premarket approval, unless and until the device is classified or 
    reclassified into class I or II or FDA issues an order finding the 
    device to be substantially equivalent, in accordance with section 
    513(i) of the act, to a predicate device that does not require 
    premarket approval. The agency determines whether new devices are 
    substantially equivalent to previously marketed devices by means of 
    premarket notification procedures in section 510(k) of the act (21 
    U.S.C. 360(k)) and part 807 of the FDA regulations (21 CFR part 807).
        Section 513(f)(2) of the act provides that any person who submits a 
    premarket notification under section 510(k) of the act for a device 
    that has not previously been classified may, within 30 days after 
    receiving an order classifying the device in class III under section 
    513(f)(1), request FDA to classify the device under the criteria set 
    forth in section 513(a)(1). FDA shall, within 60 days of receiving such 
    a request, classify the device by written order. This classification 
    shall be the initial classification of the device. Within 30 days after 
    the issuance of an order classifying the device, FDA must publish a 
    notice in the Federal Register announcing such classification.
        In accordance with section 513(f)(1) of the act, FDA issued an 
    order on March 12, 1998, classifying the Dynamic Orthotic Cranioplasty 
    (DOCTM Band) in class III, because it was not substantially 
    equivalent to a device that was introduced or delivered for 
    introduction into interstate commerce for commercial distribution 
    before May 28, 1976, or a device which was subsequently reclassified 
    into class I or class II. On March 31, 1998, Cranial Technologies, 
    Inc., submitted a petition requesting classification of the 
    DOCTM Band under section 513(f)(2) of the act. The 
    manufacturer recommended that the device be classified into class II.
        In accordance with 513(f)(2) of the act, FDA reviewed the petition 
    in order to classify the device under the criteria for classification 
    set forth in 513(a)(1) of the act. Devices are to be classified into 
    class II if general controls, by themselves, are insufficient to 
    provide reasonable assurance of safety and effectiveness, but there is 
    sufficient information to establish special controls to provide 
    reasonable assurance of the safety and effectiveness of the device for 
    its intended use. After review of the information submitted in the 
    petition and the medical literature, FDA determined that the 
    DOCTM Band can be
    
    [[Page 40651]]
    
    classified in class II with the establishment of special controls. FDA 
    believes these special controls will provide reasonable assurance of 
    safety and effectiveness of the device.
        The device is assigned the generic name ``cranial orthosis,'' and 
    it is identified as a device intended for use on infants from 3 to 18 
    months of age with moderate to severe nonsynostotic positional 
    plagiocephaly, including infants with plagiocephalic-, brachycephalic-, 
    and scaphocephalic-shaped heads. The device is intended for medical 
    purposes to apply pressure to prominent regions of an infant's cranium 
    in order to improve cranial symmetry and/or shape.
        FDA identified the following risks to health associated with this 
    type of device: (1) Skin irritation, skin breakdown and subsequent 
    infection due to excessive pressure on the skin; (2) head and neck 
    trauma due to alteration of the functional center of mass of the head 
    and the additional weight of the device especially with an infant who 
    is still developing the ability to control his/her head and neck 
    movements; (3) impairment of brain growth and development from 
    mechanical restriction of cranial growth; (4) asphyxiation due to 
    mechanical failure, poor fit, and/or excessive weight that alters the 
    infant's ability to lift the head; (5) eye trauma due to mechanical 
    failure, poor construction and/or inappropriate fit; and (6) contact 
    dermatitis due to the materials used in the construction of the device.
        FDA believes that the special controls described below address 
    these risks and provide reasonable assurance of the safety and 
    effectiveness of the device. Therefore, on May 29, 1998, FDA issued an 
    order to the petitioner classifying the cranial orthosis as described 
    previously into class II subject to the special controls described 
    below. Additionally, FDA is codifying the classification of this device 
    by adding new Sec. 882.5970.
        In addition to the general controls of the act, the cranial 
    orthosis is subject to the following special controls in order to 
    provide reasonable assurance of the safety and effectiveness of the 
    device: (1) The sale, distribution, and use of this device are 
    restricted to prescription use in accordance with 21 CFR 801.109; (2) 
    the labeling of the device must include: (a) Contraindications for the 
    use of the device on infants with synostosis or with hydrocephalus; (b) 
    warnings indicating the need to: (i) Evaluate head circumference 
    measurements and neurological status at intervals appropriate to the 
    infant's age and rate of head growth and to describe steps that should 
    be taken in order to reduce the potential for restriction of cranial 
    growth and possible impairment of brain growth and development and (ii) 
    evaluate the skin at frequent intervals, e.g., every 3 to 4 hours, and 
    to describe steps that should be taken if skin irritation or breakdown 
    occurs; (c) precautions indicating the need to: (i) Additionally treat 
    torticollis, if the positional plagiocephaly is associated with 
    torticollis; (ii) evaluate device fit and to describe the steps that 
    should be taken in order to reduce the potential for restriction of 
    cranial growth, the possible impairment of brain growth and development 
    and skin irritation and/or breakdown; and (iii) evaluate the structural 
    integrity of the device and to describe the steps that should be taken 
    to reduce the potential for the device to slip out of place and cause 
    asphyxiation or trauma to the eyes or skin; (d) adverse events, i.e., 
    skin irritation and breakdown that have occurred with the use of the 
    device; (e) clinician's instructions for casting the infant, for 
    fitting the device, and for care; and (f) parent's instructions for 
    care and use of the device; (3) the materials must be tested for 
    biocompatibility with testing appropriate for long term direct skin 
    contact.
    
    II. Environmental Impact
    
        The agency has determined under 21 CFR 25.34(b) that this action is 
    of a type that does not individually or cumulatively have a significant 
    effect on the human environment. Therefore, neither an environmental 
    assessment nor an environmental impact statement is required.
    
    III. Analysis of Impacts
    
        FDA has examined the impacts of the final rule under Executive 
    Order 12866 and the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612) and 
    the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4). Executive 
    Order 12866 directs agencies to assess all costs and benefits of 
    available regulatory alternatives and, when regulation is necessary, to 
    select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits (including 
    potential economic, environmental, public health and safety, and other 
    advantages; distributive impacts; and equity). The agency believes that 
    this final rule is consistent with the regulatory philosophy and 
    principles identified in the Executive Order. In addition, the final 
    rule is not a significant regulatory action as defined by the Executive 
    Order and so it is not subject to review under the Executive Order.
        The Regulatory Flexibility Act requires agencies to analyze 
    regulatory options that would minimize any significant impact of a rule 
    on small entities. Reclassification of these devices from class III to 
    class II will relieve manufacturers of the device of the cost of 
    complying with the premarket approval requirements of section 515 of 
    the act (21 U.S.C. 360e), and may permit small potential competitors to 
    enter the marketplace by lowering their costs. The agency therefore, 
    certifies that the final rule will not have a significant impact on a 
    substantial number of small entities. In addition, this final rule will 
    not impose costs of $100 million or more on either the private sector 
    or State, local, and tribal governments in the aggregate, and, 
    therefore, a summary statement of analysis under section 202(a) of the 
    Unfunded Mandates Reform Act is not required.
    
    IV. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
    
        This final rule contains no collections of information. Therefore, 
    clearance by the Office of Management and Budget under the Paperwork 
    Reduction Act of 1995 is not required.
    
    V. References
    
        The following references have been placed on display in the Dockets 
    Management Branch (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers 
    Lane, rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852, and may be seen by interested 
    persons between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.
        1. Petition from Cranial Technologies, Inc., dated March 31, 
    1998.
        2. Hellbusch, J. L., L. C. Hellbusch, and R. J. Bruneteau, 
    ``Active Counter-Positioning Treatment of Deformational 
    Plagiocephaly,'' Nebraska Medical Journal, vol. 80, pp. 344 to 349, 
    1995.
        3. Moss, S. D. et. al., ``Diagnosis and Management of the 
    Misshapen Head in the Neonate,'' Pediatric Review, vol. 4, pp. 4 to 
    8, 1993.
        Therefore, under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act and under 
    authority delegated to the Commissioner of Food and Drugs, 21 CFR part 
    882 is amended as follows:
    
    List of Subjects in 21 CFR Part 882
    
        Medical devices.
    
    PART 882--NEUROLOGICAL DEVICES
    
        1. The authority citation for 21 CFR part 882 continues to read as 
    follows:
    
        Authority: 21 U.S.C. 351, 360, 360c, 360e, 360j, 371.
    
        2. Section 882.5970 is added to subpart F to read as follows:
    
    Sec. 882.5970   Cranial orthosis.
    
        (a) Identification. A cranial orthosis is a device that is intended 
    for medical
    
    [[Page 40652]]
    
    purposes to apply pressure to prominent regions of an infant's cranium 
    in order to improve cranial symmetry and/or shape in infants from 3 to 
    18 months of age, with moderate to severe nonsynostotic positional 
    plagiocephaly, including infants with plagiocephalic-, brachycephalic-, 
    and scaphocephalic-shaped heads.
        (b) Classification. Class II (special controls) (prescription use 
    in accordance with Sec. 801.109 of this chapter, biocompatibility 
    testing, and labeling (contraindications, warnings, precautions, 
    adverse events, instructions for physicians and parents)).
    
        Dated: July 21, 1998.
    Elizabeth D. Jacobson,
    Deputy Director for Science, Center for Devices and Radiological 
    Health.
    [FR Doc. 98-20308 Filed 7-29-98; 8:45 am]
    BILLING CODE 4160-01-F
    
    
    

Document Information

Effective Date:
8/31/1998
Published:
07/30/1998
Department:
Food and Drug Administration
Entry Type:
Rule
Action:
Final rule.
Document Number:
98-20308
Dates:
August 31, 1998.
Pages:
40650-40652 (3 pages)
Docket Numbers:
Docket No. 98N-0513
PDF File:
98-20308.pdf
CFR: (1)
21 CFR 882.5970