Girish K Srivastava 1,2,
Maria T Garcia 3, José Carlos Pastor 1,2,4
1.
Instituto Universitario de
Oftalmobiologia Aplicada (IOBA), Universidad de Valladolid, Valladolid, Spain.
2.
Centro en Red de Medicina
Regenerativa y Terapia Celular de Castilla y León, Spain.
3.
Vision R+D. Valladolid. Spain
4.
Hospital Clinico Universitario de
Valladolid, Valladolid, Spain
Abstract
Medical devices need to pass ISO recommended safety assessments before clinical use. Perfluorocarbon liquids (PFOs) are used in intraocular surgery. Recent cases of blindness raised questions against current cytotoxicity test methods applied for safety assessments of PFOs. The study proposes to assess the cell culture responses to different PFOs by applying a direct contact method incorporating few new technical steps for testing volatile substances such as PFOs. Limitations of current methods; extract dilution exposure and agarose overlay methods, were recorded. ARPE-19 cell cultures were prepared, and the direct contact and extract dilution exposure methods were performed for different PFOs. Agarose overlay method was performed partially. Results showed that for non toxic PFOs, the ARPE-19 cell cultures showed different tendencies of growths at 24 and 72 hours for PFOs of different manufacturers maintaining always cell viability ≥ 70%; however, the difference was not significant for PFOs of a same manufacturer. The toxic PFOs were detected toxic which extract dilution exposure method failed to detect. There were several limitations detected in applying the current cytotoxicity test methods. One crucial limitation was that it was unknown if a quantity of PFO or toxicity components of PFO reached in contact with cell culture, which was not in the case of new direct contact method. It has detected non-toxic and toxic PFOs lots which were manufactured differently. The study strengthens the arguments that a direct cytotoxicity method with the new technical steps is essential for safety assessments of volatile substances and guarantying safety of such medical devices.
Medical devices need to pass ISO recommended safety assessments before clinical use. Perfluorocarbon liquids (PFOs) are used in intraocular surgery. Recent cases of blindness raised questions against current cytotoxicity test methods applied for safety assessments of PFOs. The study proposes to assess the cell culture responses to different PFOs by applying a direct contact method incorporating few new technical steps for testing volatile substances such as PFOs. Limitations of current methods; extract dilution exposure and agarose overlay methods, were recorded. ARPE-19 cell cultures were prepared, and the direct contact and extract dilution exposure methods were performed for different PFOs. Agarose overlay method was performed partially. Results showed that for non toxic PFOs, the ARPE-19 cell cultures showed different tendencies of growths at 24 and 72 hours for PFOs of different manufacturers maintaining always cell viability ≥ 70%; however, the difference was not significant for PFOs of a same manufacturer. The toxic PFOs were detected toxic which extract dilution exposure method failed to detect. There were several limitations detected in applying the current cytotoxicity test methods. One crucial limitation was that it was unknown if a quantity of PFO or toxicity components of PFO reached in contact with cell culture, which was not in the case of new direct contact method. It has detected non-toxic and toxic PFOs lots which were manufactured differently. The study strengthens the arguments that a direct cytotoxicity method with the new technical steps is essential for safety assessments of volatile substances and guarantying safety of such medical devices.
Keywords: Medical device quality assurance, Direct contact method, Cytotoxicity, Volatile substances
References
Becker, R.A., Janus, E.R., White, R.D., Kruszewski,
F.H., and Brackett, R.E. (2009). Good laboratory practices and safety
assessments. Environ. Health Perspect. 117, A482-483; author reply A483-484.
Bentley, D. (1999). CE marking--what does it really
mean? J. Tissue Viability 9, 11–15.
Bollen, L.S. (2005). New trends in biological
evaluation of medical devices. Med. Device Technol. 16, 10–15.
Donawa, M. (2003). Review of the Medical Device
Directive. Med. Device Technol. 14, 20–23.
Donawa, M.E. (1997). Complying with US and European
complaint handling requirements. Med. Device Technol. 8, 12–15.
Eckardt, C., Nicolai, U., Winter, M., and Knop, E.
(1991). Experimental intraocular tolerance to liquid perfluorooctane and
perfluoropolyether. Retina Phila. Pa 11, 375–384.
Helmus, M.N., Gibbons, D.F., and Cebon, D. (2008).
Biocompatibility: meeting a key functional requirement of next-generation
medical devices. Toxicol. Pathol. 36, 70–80.
Lamph, S. (2012). Regulation of medical devices
outside the European Union. J. R. Soc. Med. 105 Suppl 1, S12-21.
Li, W., Zhou, J., and Xu, Y. (2015). Study of the in
vitro cytotoxicity testing of medical devices. Biomed.
Rep. 3, 617–620.
Pastor, J.C., Coco, R.M.,
Fernandez-Bueno, I., Alonso-Alonso, M.L., Medina, J., Sanz-Arranz, A., Rull,
F., Gayoso, M.J., Dueñas, A., Garcia-Gutierrez, M.T., et al. (2017). Acute Retinal Damage
After Using A Toxic Perfluoro-Octane For Vitreo-Retinal Surgery. Retina Phila.
Pa 37, 1140–1151.
Peyman, G.A., Schulman, J.A., and Sullivan, B. (1995).
Perfluorocarbon liquids in ophthalmology. Surv. Ophthalmol. 39, 375–395.
Reeve, L., and Baldrick, P. (2017). Biocompatibility
assessments for medical devices - evolving regulatory considerations. Expert
Rev. Med. Devices 14, 161–167.
Schuh, J.C.L. (2008). Medical device regulations and
testing for toxicologic pathologists. Toxicol. Pathol. 36, 63–69.
Simons, J.H., and Harland, W.J. (1949). Production of
Fluorocarbons III. From Hydrogen Fluoride‐Soluble Organic Substances. J
Electrochem Soc 95, 55–59.
Publication
Ms. Ref. No.: AllBios-A0101004
Reviewer 1 Reviewer 2
Received: 01072017
Accepted: 02122017
Article in Press: 03122017
Article in Press: 03122017