It didn’t take long for the journal Heart Rhythm to knock back St. Jude’s assertion that it should retract the article by Dr Robert Hauser, in which its Riata and Riata ST ICD leads appeared to perform significantly less well according to some parameters than Medtronic’s Quattro Secure “equivalent”.
According to a report issued in today’s New York Times, the journal’s editor, Dr. Douglas P. Zipes, “said in an interview late Monday that the publication had looked at St. Jude’s complaint and did not plan to pull back the article, which had undergone review by experts associated with the journal before its online publication two weeks ago”.
Dr. Zipes said that the data St. Jude released on Friday to refute Dr. Hauser’s report had not been independently reviewed to determine its accuracy. He said he had offered the company an opportunity to submit its data to the journal for review, but planned to publish Dr. Hauser’s article in the next print edition of Heart Rhythm.
St. Jude, based in St. Paul, had no immediate response on Tuesday to the rejection of its request. Dr. Zipes said he had informed the company of his decision on Monday.
See, we’re starting to feel sorry for a medtech giant again, aren’t we? Their claim that the data was biased looks reasonable to us on at least one of the points, namely that Dr Hauser’s data didn’t appear to be wholly comparing apples with apples. No doubt they’ll take Dr Zipes up on his kind offer to submit something of its own.
Source: New York Times
published: April 10, 2012 in: Alerts/Adverse Events, Cardio, Clinical Studies/Trials, Medtronic, St Jude