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 Reclassifies Pedicle Screws
Legal & Regulatory and Reimbursement

FDA Reclassifies Pedicle Screws

January 24, 2017 2 min read Premium comments

Advertisement

FDA Reclassifies Pedicle Screws
Pedicle Screw / Courtesy of FDA and Pedbones
Secondary

It’s official and completes a long regulatory, legal and scientific journey. Effective December 30, 2016, pedicle screw systems became classified as a Class II/special controls device by the FDA.

The agency is also renaming the device “thoracolumbosacral pedicle screw systems.”

Four years ago, after years of off-label use, the FDA’s orthopedic panel finally recommended that the FDA acknowledge what practitioners were already doing.

The devices are intended to treat degenerative disc disease and spondylolisthesis other than either severe spondylolisthesis (grades 3 and 4) at L5-S1, or degenerative spondylolisthesis with objective evidence of neurologic impairment.

Pedicle screw spinal systems are one of the remaining pre-amendments Class III devices, which means that they were marketed prior to the Medical Device Amendments of 1976. FDA originally classified them as the highest-risk Class III, but to date they’ve been approved for the U.S. market via the less-stringent 510(k) premarket notification process.

FDA staff recommended the down-classification based on data provided by some 20 manufacturers in response to a 2009 FDA request for information that safety and effectiveness of pedicle screws can be assured through non-clinical testing, material composition, sterilization validation and labeling.

The agency published a proposed order to propose different classifications for rigid pedicle screw systems and semi-rigid systems (SRSs) in the Federal Register of November 12, 2014. Moreover, on May 22, 2013, the FDA held a classification meeting of the Orthopedic and Rehabilitation Devices Panel to discuss pedicle screw systems, which include rigid pedicle screw systems and SRSs. The agency received and has considered all the comments on the 2014 Proposed Order and met the legal requirements to reclassify the device.

Since the original 1998 classification, the agency wrote that changes in technological characteristics have occurred, “leading to the emergence of a new type of pedicle screw system, SRSs, previously referred to as dynamic stabilization systems (DSSs). SRSs are a subset of the pedicle screw systems. SRSs are defined as systems that contain one or more non-uniform and/or non-metallic longitudinal elements (e.g., polymer cords, moveable screw heads, springs) that allow more motion or flexibility (e.g., bending, rotation, translation) compared to rigid systems and do not provide immediate rigid fixation to the spinal column as an adjunct to spinal fusion procedures.”

This final classification puts to rest long legal battles resulting from the off-label uses of the screws that were originally only approved for use in the long bones of the arms and legs.

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