LinkedInXFacebook
Subscribe
Orthopedics This Week
  • My Feed
  • |Posts
  • |Events
  • |MSK Innovations
  • |Power Rankings
  • |Masterclasses
  • |Technology Awards
  • Press Releases
  • |Advertising
  • |Job Board
  • Spine
  • ◆Joints
  • ◆Upper Extremities
  • ◆Foot & Ankle
  • ◆Sports Medicine
  • ◆Pain Mgmt
  • ◆Trauma
  • ◆Biologics
  • ◆Technology
  • ◆People
  • ◆Company News
  • ◆Legal & Regulatory
Home/Legal & Regulatory and Reimbursement/FDA Has Most August “Clearances” in Years
Legal & Regulatory and Reimbursement

FDA Has Most August “Clearances” in Years

September 18, 2013 1 min read Premium comments

Advertisement

FDA Has Most August “Clearances” in Years
Secondary

The FDA “cleared” 284 devices in August 2013 through the 510(k) program. Of those, 45 were orthopedic or spine related.

During the same August period in 2010, 2011 and 2012, the agency cleared 241, 271 and 257 devices, respectively. Clearances are for products that have shown to be “Substantially Equivalent” to previously approved products.

The list of companies receiving recent clearances included familiar names:

  • Biomet
  • DePuy
  • Medtronic
  • Orthofix
  • NuVasive
  • Arthrocare
  • Zimmer
  • Aesculap
  • Globus
  • Spineguard
  • Spine Wave
  • Centinel Spine
  • X-Spine
  • Spinal USA

Other less well-known names included:

  • Ascension Orthopedics
  • Osseus Fusion
  • Captiva Spine
  • Iconacy Orthopedic Implants
  • Core-Nexus
  • FX Solutions
  • Southern Spine
  • Orthohelix Surgical Designs
  • Tissue Regeneration Systems
  • Accel Spine
  • Ortho Development
  • Medacta International
  • Flower Orthopedics
  • Neurostructures
  • Medyssey
  • Ingen Orthopedics
  • Next Orthosurgical
  • Neosteo
  • Rotation Medical
  • United Orthopedic

Cleared devices ranged from personalized care systems, fixation devices, interbody systems, nerve detectors, hip and shoulder systems, coblation wands, navigation instruments, bone fillers to bone staplers.

To see the entire list of all cleared devices, click here.

React:

Discussion

14
DS
Dr. Sarah MitchellOrthopedic Surgeon · Mayo Clinic

This is a fascinating development. In my practice we've seen similar outcomes with the revised protocol. The key differentiator seems to be patient selection criteria. Has anyone else noticed the correlation with BMI thresholds?

8
JT
James Thornton, MDSpine Fellow · HSS

Great point. I'd push back slightly on the conclusion, the sample size in the cited study is too small to draw population-level inferences. That said, the directional signal is compelling and worth a larger RCT.

5
RP
R. PatelSports Medicine · Stanford

We implemented a similar approach last year. Early results are promising but we're still gathering 12-month follow-up data. Happy to share our protocol if anyone is interested.

Join the conversation

Orthopedic professionals are discussing this. Sign in and upgrade to read every comment and add your voice.

Subscribe

Get Full Access

Read every OTW article and join member discussions for $24.99/month.

Get Full Access

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement

Orthopedics This Week

The most trusted source in orthopedic industry news since 2005. Covering spine, joints, trauma, biologics, and the business of orthopedics.

A publication of RRY Publications, LLC

LinkedInXFacebook

Categories

  • Spine
  • Joints
  • Upper Extremities
  • Foot & Ankle
  • Sports Medicine
  • Pain Mgmt
  • Trauma
  • Biologics
  • Technology
  • People
  • Company News
  • Legal & Regulatory

Resources

  • Subscribe
  • Community Posts
  • Job Board
  • Press Release Opportunities
  • Power Rankings
  • About OTW
  • Advertise
  • Contact Us

Get Full Access

Unlimited articles, community posts, and Power Rankings.

Get Full Access

Plans start at $24.99/mo · Annual saves 20%

© 2026 Orthopedics This Week · RRY Publications, LLC

Privacy PolicyTerms of ServiceCookie Policy