Tibial Nailing Advancement for Bone Healing

by | Jun 10, 2021 | Biocompatibility, Clinical Trials, Medical Devices, Quality

Traditional practice for treating a broken tibia shaft utilizes a central nail with load-sharing capabilities to produce high stability and early postoperative patient mobilization, referenced as EXPERT NAIL™ Tibial Nails. In a recent review of this treatment, it was determined that several outcome-related problems were identified for the purpose of engineering a new treatment method attempting to address them. These issues are comprised of delayed bone union, malunion, nonunion, patient pain and discomfort, anatomical nail fit, surgeon usability aspects, and instrumentation for various surgical approaches.

A clinical solution, given the name TN-Advanced Tibial Nail (TN-A) incorporates five proximal and four distal multiplanar locking capabilities with an added design feature for the purpose of providing angular stability. This innovative nailing system is specifically designed to enable surgeons to correct shorter bone fragments with elevated stability for the purpose of elevating bone healing and avoid secondary loss of reduction. One significant advantage of this new design is wherever the locking screws are inserted into the locking holes of the TN-A (except the proximal 7 mm nail slot), the inlays offer angular stability between locking screws and nail without any need for added instrumentation and surgical steps. The optimal candidates for the TN-A implants are adults and adolescents ranging from 12 – 21 years of age, where growth plates have already fused together. More specifically, these implants are for open and closed proximal and distal tibial fractures, open and closed tibial shaft fractures, and tibial malunions and nonunions.

Regulatory and quality standards for temporary implantable devices (class III) such as the TN-A are extensively detailed, precise and highly intricate. EMMA International has incurred specialized firsthand experience implementing a streamlined Quality Management System for successful Class III medical device quality compliance and FDA regulatory submissions.

As the world opens back up, EMMA International is here to provide full-circle solutions for all aspects of the MedTech industry. Give us a call at 248-987-4497 or email us at info@emmainternational.com to learn more about how EMMA International can take the stress out of quality and regulatory compliance!

Approved Solutions (2020) TN-Advanced Tibial Nailing System, Retrieved on 06/02/2021 from https://approvedsolutions.aofoundation.org/approvedsolutionsfolder/2020/tn-advanced-tibial-nailing-system#tab=details;

Zach Nies

Zach Nies

Quality Engineer (Co-Op) - Mr. Nies has experience in combination products, pharmaceuticals, and FDA compliance for many life science industries. He has experience with many different elements of quality and regulatory compliance. Mr. Nies is completing a Bachelor of Engineer degree in Biomedical Engineering from Wayne State University.

More Resources

FDA’s Refusal to Accept Process

FDA’s Refusal to Accept Process

Before the submission of a 510(k) premarket notification, the purpose of which is to notify the FDA of the manufacturer’s intent to market a medical device,[i] there is a provision for acceptance review. This review serves as a method to assess whether a submission is administratively complete and includes all necessary information for FDA to determine substantial equivalence under section 513(i) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic (FD&C) Act (21 United States Code (U.S.C.) § 360c(i)). To establish substantial equivalence under this provision, FDA must find the same intended use as the predicate device and either have the same technological characteristics as the predicate device or appropriate clinical and scientific data necessary to establish that the device is safe and effective as the predicate device. If the Authority is unable to determine substantial equivalence due to insufficient information, it may request for additional information to make that determination. Therefore, as a part of the acceptance review, the FDA staff follows the acceptance checklist[ii] to ensure that the application is administratively complete. These administrative elements are identified as RTA items and are required to be presented. The purpose of conducting the acceptance review is for the Lead Reviewer to determine whether the 510(k) submission meets the minimum threshold of acceptability and should be accepted for substantive review.[iii]
Empowering Your Workforce through Kaizen

Empowering Your Workforce through Kaizen

Last week, I touched on the idea of involving and empowering all employees in the workplace through the corrective and preventive actions process by fostering taking initiative and a problem-solving (refer to blogpost ‘The Art of Addressing Non-Conformances in Operations’). To expand on this concept a bit further, we’re going to be looking at Kaizen–a continuous improvement strategy in which employees at all levels are also empowered to solve problems towards big gains.
FDA’s draft guidelines on Remote Regulatory Assessments (RRAs)

FDA’s draft guidelines on Remote Regulatory Assessments (RRAs)

The pandemic has been a challenging time for all industries including the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The FDA had to alter the manner in which it conducted its operations. One set of tools adopted by the FDA in response to COVID-19 was the remote regulatory assessment (RRAs).

Ready to learn more about working with us?

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This