Adjustable Medical Device for Anatomical Defect Closure

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Current medical devices and systems for closing anatomical defects in body tissues are limited in their effectiveness and versatility, particularly in terms of diameter reduction and secure engagement with tissue.

Innovation Solution

A medical device comprising a first portion for engaging body tissue and a second portion for engaging the anatomical defect, which can be reduced in diameter using mechanisms such as rotation, tension on a cord, or barbs to effectively close the defect.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Ease of manufacture

If the device structure is simplified for easier manufacture, then the manufacturing complexity is reduced, but the ability to achieve reliable diameter reduction and secure tissue engagement is compromised

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvemanufacturing simplicityVSAvoiddefect closure reliability
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of manufactureVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The device is divided into multiple functional segments: a first portion for initial tissue engagement, a second portion for defect engagement, and multiple barb configurations. This segmentation allows each part to perform its specific function reliably while maintaining overall manufacturing simplicity through modular construction.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The device employs a nested structure where the second portion is positioned within or alongside the first portion, and barbs are integrated into the device body. This nesting reduces the number of separate components needed, simplifying manufacture while ensuring reliable engagement through the coordinated action of nested elements.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #7Nested doll (Nesting)

2Adaptability or versatility

If the device includes multiple barb configurations and complex mechanisms for diameter reduction, then the secure engagement and adaptability improve, but the device complexity increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvetissue engagement adaptabilityVSAvoidstructural complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The device integrates multiple functions into a single structure: the first and second portions provide sequential engagement, while barbs extending in different circumferential directions offer multi-directional securing. This multi-functionality achieves high adaptability without requiring multiple separate devices, balancing versatility with manageable complexity.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #6Universality (Multi-functionality)

Solution Approach 2:

The barbs are configured to extend in different circumferential directions rather than uniformly, creating an asymmetric pattern that enhances engagement adaptability with tissue structures. This asymmetric design provides versatile securing options while maintaining a relatively simple overall device structure.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #4Asymmetry

3Reliability

If the second portion is made capable of diameter reduction through rotation or cord tension, then the defect closure effectiveness improves, but the ease of operation increases difficulty

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvedefect closure effectivenessVSAvoidoperation simplicity
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSEase of operation

Solution Approach 1:

The device incorporates a cord that can be tensioned to automatically reduce the diameter of the second portion, and barbs that engage tissue to prevent rotation. This self-service mechanism reduces the need for complex manual manipulation, making the operation simpler while maintaining reliable defect closure through the automated diameter reduction process.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

4Reliability

If the barbs are configured to prevent rotation in one direction while allowing rotation for diameter reduction, then the secure engagement is improved, but the device complexity increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvetissue engagement securityVSAvoidmechanism complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

Instead of preventing rotation in both directions or allowing free rotation, the device inverts the approach by allowing rotation in one direction for diameter reduction while using asymmetrically oriented barbs to prevent rotation in the opposite direction. This inverted constraint system provides secure engagement with minimal complexity.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #13The other way round (Inversion)

Data Source

PatentUS20250040919A1Drainage devices, systems, and methods
Publication Date: 2025.02.06 BOSTON SCIENTIFIC SCIMED INC
  • US20250040919A1 patent drawing
  • US20250040919A1 patent drawing
  • US20250040919A1 patent drawing

AI summary

Devices, systems, and methods for treating defects in anatomical structures are disclosed. A device may include a first portion configured to engage body tissue and a second portion extending distally from the first portion. The second portion may be elongated and configured to extend into and/or engage tissue of a defect in an anatomical structure. The device may have an expanded or deployed configuration in which at least the second portion of the device has a first diameter. The device may be configured to be adjusted to a closed configuration in which the second portion of the device has a second diameter that is reduced relative to the first diameter. The second portion of the device may include one or more tissue engaging elements configured to engage the defect such that adjusting the second portion to the reduced second diameter closes the defect.