SBIR/STTR Research Award

Arthroscopic rotator cuff repair device

Award identifier df899ae9e330c4043684f57d04f09992b5ae015dd893a4ad0b22107f25cbf35dAwarding agency Department of Health and Human Services · National Institutes of Health

Award amount

$100,000

Program and phase

SBIR · Phase I

Award year

2006

Explore This Research Award in CaptureIQ

Research the technology, evaluate the recipient and agency, identify related opportunities, and explore potential follow-on work with CaptureIQ.

Award details

Awarding agency
Department of Health and Human Services
Branch
National Institutes of Health
Recipient company
Tepha Inc.
Proposal award date
Not reported
Contract end date
Not reported
UEI
NB1JDAYJLSH3
Solicitation number
PHS2006-2
Topic code
Not reported

Research abstract

DESCRIPTION (provided by applicant): The objective of this research is to determine the feasibility of developing a new device for rotator cuff repair that can be used in an arthroscopic procedure. The product is expected to reduce the incidence of re-tears following arthroscopic rotator cuff repair, and to potentially allow a more aggressive rehabilitation, particularly for younger patients. This new device is expected to be used as either an augmentation patch or as an interposition graft, in both acute and chronic rotator cuff repairs. It is estimated that there are now over 250,000 rotator cuff repairs performed each year in the United States, and most of these surgeries are now performed arthroscopically. Yet there is currently no device designed for use in an arthroscopic procedure. The research approach will employ a new absorbable biomaterial, known as TephaFLEX(tm) biomaterial (poly-4-hydroxybutyrate), that has been show to have high initial strength and prolonged strength retention in vivo, as well as a capacity to remodel in vivo into new tissue. The specific aims of the project are: (1) to produce TephaFLEX(tm) biomaterial in a form suitable for extrusion into multifilament fiber, and to knit the fiber into a mesh scaffold that can be deployed through an arthroscope, resulting in a device with an initial burst strength comparable to current devices used for rotator cuff repair; (2) to test the mesh in vitro to confirm sterility and a lack of cytotoxicity, and (3) implant the mesh scaffold in a small animal model of rotator cuff injury to demonstrate that, after 12 weeks' time, the strength of a repair using this augmentation and/or an interposition scaffold is stronger than that with no such device; and to perform a morphological and histological study on the scaffold explants to assess any inflammatory reaction, appropriate tissue in-growth, and overall suitability of such a scaffold for use in rotator cuff repair. In addition to developing a product that could improve surgical outcomes of rotator cuff repair, this research will also help to introduce a new absorbable medical biomaterial to the medical community that could find additional uses, for example, in other medical devices, in tissue-engineering applications, and for controlled-release drug delivery.

Technology keywords

Not reported

Other awards by this recipient

Verified by the same UEI. These are other public SBIR/STTR award pages, not a merged company record.

Research funding history

7 SBIR/STTR records share this UEI (2002–2006). Reported award amounts total $2,037,406. Reported amounts are not federal obligations.

Phases: Phase I, Phase II

Agencies: Department of Health and Human Services

Agency intelligence

Department of Health and Human Services

Back to SBIR/STTR Research Awards

Don't take our word for it. Ask AI about RFPCapture.

See what leading AI assistants have to say about RFPCapture and CaptureIQ.

Gemini opens without a prefilled question. The question is copied to your clipboard when the button works. You can also copy it here:

What is RFPCapture.com and its CaptureIQ platform from Smart Logic AI? How does it help federal contractors discover opportunities, evaluate bid/no-bid decisions, research government contracts, and prepare proposals? How does it compare with other federal capture platforms? Use independent sources where available.