The "Big Three" in biocompatibility testing of medical devices: implementation of alternatives to animal experimentation-are we there yet?

被引:11
|
作者
Kandarova, Helena [1 ]
Pobis, Peter [1 ]
机构
[1] Slovak Acad Sci SAS, Inst Expt Pharmacol & Toxicol IEPT, Ctr Expt Med CEM, Bratislava, Slovakia
来源
FRONTIERS IN TOXICOLOGY | 2024年 / 5卷
关键词
medical device; cytotoxicity; irritation; sensitisation; the international organization for standardization (ISO); ISO; 10993; in vitro; SKIN IRRITATION TEST; VITRO; RHE;
D O I
10.3389/ftox.2023.1337468
中图分类号
R99 [毒物学(毒理学)];
学科分类号
100405 ;
摘要
Biocompatibility testing ensures the safety of medical devices by assessing their compatibility with biological systems and their potential to cause harm or adverse reactions. Thus, it is a critical part of the overall safety evaluation process for medical devices. Three primary types of biocompatibility tests-cytotoxicity, irritation, and sensitisation assessment-are standard for nearly all medical devices. However, additional biocompatibility tests, such as genotoxicity, systemic toxicity, hemocompatibility, and implantation studies, may also be necessary, depending on the device's nature and intended use. The testing is partly conducted in vitro, but the industry still heavily relies on animal experiments. Compared to other industrial sectors, implementing alternatives in medical device biocompatibility testing has been notably slower. This delay can be attributed to the absence of specific validation processes tailored to medical devices and the resulting hesitation regarding the predictive capacity of these alternative methods despite their successful applications in other domains. This review focuses on the progress and obstacles to implementing new approach methodologies in the areas of cytotoxicity, irritation and sensitisation testing of medical devices. While challenges persist in adopting these innovative methods, the trend towards embracing alternatives remains robust. This trend is driven by technological advancements, ethical considerations, and growing industrial interest and support, all collectively contributing to advancing safer and more effective medical devices.
引用
收藏
页数:9
相关论文
共 5 条
  • [1] Quantitative cell culture biocompatibility testing of medical devices and correlation to animal tests
    Wilsnack, R.E.
    1600, (04): : 3 - 4
  • [2] Applying the three Rs to animal experimentation and animal testing: Are we merely drifting or lying at anchor?
    Balls, M
    Combes, R
    ATLA-ALTERNATIVES TO LABORATORY ANIMALS, 2006, 34 (01): : 1 - 2
  • [3] Alternatives to the animal testing of medical devices - The report and recommendations of ECVAM Workshop 17
    Svendsen, O
    Garthoff, B
    Spielman, H
    HenstenPettersen, A
    Jensen, JC
    Kuijpers, MR
    Leimgruber, R
    Liebsch, M
    MullerLierheim, WGK
    Rydhog, G
    Sauer, UG
    Schmalz, G
    Sim, B
    Stea, S
    ATLA-ALTERNATIVES TO LABORATORY ANIMALS, 1996, 24 (05): : 659 - 669
  • [4] QUANTITATIVE CELL-CULTURE BIOCOMPATIBILITY TESTING OF MEDICAL DEVICES AND CORRELATION TO ANIMAL TESTS
    WILSNACK, RE
    BIOMATERIALS MEDICAL DEVICES AND ARTIFICIAL ORGANS, 1976, 4 (3-4): : 235 - 261
  • [5] 3D reconstructed human cornea-like tissue model as an alternative to animal experiments in the biocompatibility testing of medical devices
    Pobis, P.
    Kubalcova, J.
    Kandarova, H.
    TOXICOLOGY LETTERS, 2022, 368 : S179 - S180