The Scandal of Defective Medical Device Approval in UK

//The Scandal of Defective Medical Device Approval in UK

The Scandal of Defective Medical Device Approval in UK

Deborah Cohen, BMJ investigator

October 28, 2012 ~ Working with undercover reporters from The Daily Telegraph in the UK, the British Medical Journal’s (BMJ) Deborah Cohen has exposed, “a fragmented, poorly regulated, market driven system, with financial incentives to prioritize manufacturers’ interests over those of patients, and with no requirement for clinical evaluation of a device’s safety or effectiveness,” says BMJ editor Fiona Godlee in this editorial (here).

There are about 70 notifying bodies scattered around Europe, some a small office over a garage such as one in Istanbul, Turkey.  It is up to these offices to decide whether or not a medical device can be sold in that country.

MDND readers however understand that thousands of medical devices are cleared for marketing in the U.S. with no clinical trials required,  so the U.S. and EU systems are both  decidedly hands-off.

The investigators created a fictitious hip implant, called the Changi TMH (total metal hip), which was modeled on a recalled hip, one that was taken off the market in 2010.

Cohen, the investigations editor of the BMJ, began the investigation after a number of high-profile device failures in Europe, such as metal-on-metal hips and industrial silicone-filled breast implants (PIP) that began leaking in women.

BMJ investigation undercover Czech Republic regulators

Bogus Hip Shopped Around

The Changi hip was shopped to several notifying bodies at a time even though that is not allowed by law.

The “manufacturer” created glossy brochure about the cobalt-chromium metal hip and took it to 14 notifying bodies shopping around the hip in this undercover investigation complete with a submission that showed many flaws with the hip prosthesis.

Many countries were interested, and the investigators submitted their full application complete with a payment for processing documents to Slovakia. One Czech Republic regulator said to the “manufacturer,” ‘we are on your side, not the side of patients.’

Of the fourteen notifying bodies they visited, only four raised concerns about the implant being a hip replacement.

This is a fascinating story of how backroom offices operate in the sketchy yet lucrative world of medical device regulation and the regulator-gatekeepers who get them on the market.

“The notified bodies lie at the heart of the problems with the current system….most are reluctant to demand clinical data and lack the capacity to challenge or test the data against expert advice,” conclude investigators.

“Many said they were cheap and fast, we have to ask whether this is acceptable. Our investigation suggests the few devices fail to obtain approval,” reports Cohen.

Cohen and the BMJ asked the EU’s version of the FDA, called the MHRA, how many high risk devices – those implanted inside the body- were currently in use and “refused to say what data had been submitted by manufacturers because this was deemed commercially confidential.”  (here)

Learn More:

BMJ, October 23, 2012, Faulty Hip Implant Shows up Failings of EU Regulation


By | 2012-10-29T00:12:52+00:00 October 29th, 2012|Media Reports|2 Comments

About the Author:

I’m National News Editor, Jane Akre and I began Mesh Medical Device News Desk aka Mesh News Desk (MND) in the summer of 2011 just after the Food and Drug Administration issued an explicit warning to the public that complications associated with surgical mesh used for prolapse repair (POP) and incontinence (SUI) are NOT rare! That was the starting point for the litigation you see today and thousands of lawsuits have been filed by women whose lives have been altered, some permanently, by the use of this petroleum-based product.


  1. Ruth October 29, 2012 at 3:45 pm - Reply

    This is an absolutely shocking example of the unbelievable disregard of ethics in medical device regulation. Thank you for highlighting it. I hope this article is widely distributed!

  2. teresa hughes October 30, 2012 at 1:10 am - Reply

    I am not in the least surprised. When I received the number of transvaginal mesh complications from parliament which where from the NHS source statistics The Medicine Health Regulator had at that time only 107 recorded adverse incidents.

    The statistics from parliament revealed nearly 3000 mesh complications. The MHRA said that they did not know of these stats when I met at their headquarters they said that they where private and could not get hold of them

    They still have not added them to their database so their statistics are incorrect. Does anyone care in The Health Dept, The MHRA or The Health Select Committee or for that fact the Government of The United Kingdom.

    Shame on them all…

    What use is The MHRA in The United Kingdom?

Leave A Comment