(251 days)
The Well Lead Extraction Bag is intended for use by qualified surgeons in tissue extraction procedures during laparoscopic surgery.
The Well Lead Extraction Bag is used for removal of tissue specimens during a suitable laparoscopic surgery.The device consists of a cylindrical sheath, a pusher and a polyurethane bag that minimizes spillage and intraoperative contamination by isolating and containing specimens. The bag is made of biocompatible high strength PU material, it is transparent and soft. which makes a qood visuality.
The device is composed of biologically safe materials. It is supplied sterile and intended for single use only. It's easy to enter, open, close and exit, higher efficiency, and different type and size available. It is offerd in 4 types: Type B, Type C, Type D and range in bag volume from 200ml for different surgery needs. The well thought-out rang of types and sizes are suitable for all laparoscopic procedures. The main differences between all types are the deployment system and operation method.
The provided text describes a 510(k) submission for the "Well Lead Extraction Bag" and focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence to predicate devices rather than providing a detailed study proving the device meets specific acceptance criteria in a clinical setting. Therefore, many of the requested elements (like sample size for test sets, expert ground truth, MRMC studies, standalone performance, training set details) are not explicitly present in the provided document, as they are not typically required for a 510(k) for this type of device.
However, I can extract information related to non-clinical performance testing and what constitutes the acceptance criteria as described in the document.
1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance
| Acceptance Criteria (Parameters Tested) | Reported Device Performance |
|---|---|
| General Performance: | |
| - Leakage | Meets pre-determined testing and acceptance criteria |
| - Rated Volume | Meets pre-determined testing and acceptance criteria |
| - Tensile Strength | Meets pre-determined testing and acceptance criteria |
| - Determining the Dimensions | Meets pre-determined testing and acceptance criteria |
| Biocompatibility (as per ISO 10993-1:2009): | |
| - Cytotoxicity (as per ISO 10993-5:2009) | Device components in contact with the patient are biocompatible. |
| - Irritation (as per ISO 10993-10:2010) | Device components in contact with the patient are biocompatible. |
| - Sensitization (as per ISO 10993-10:2010) | Device components in contact with the patient are biocompatible. |
2. Sample size used for the test set and the data provenance (e.g. country of origin of the data, retrospective or prospective)
The document mentions "Testing datas and results are included in this submission" but does not specify the sample size for the non-clinical performance tests (e.g., how many bags were tested for leakage, tensile strength, etc.).
The data provenance is implied to be from the manufacturer's internal testing as part of their 510(k) submission, likely conducted in China where the manufacturer (WELL LEAD MEDICAL CO., LTD.) is located. The tests are non-clinical, so terms like "retrospective or prospective" do not directly apply in the same way they would to human subject studies.
3. Number of experts used to establish the ground truth for the test set and the qualifications of those experts (e.g. radiologist with 10 years of experience)
Not applicable/Not provided. For non-clinical performance testing of a medical device like an extraction bag, ground truth is established through standardized engineering and laboratory testing protocols, not by expert human graders. The "experts" involved would be technicians or engineers conducting the tests and interpreting the results according to the specified standards (e.g., ISO standards for biocompatibility).
4. Adjudication method (e.g. 2+1, 3+1, none) for the test set
Not applicable/Not provided. Adjudication methods like 2+1 or 3+1 are used in clinical trials or studies involving human assessment where there might be disagreements in interpretation. For objective, non-clinical performance tests, results are typically quantitative and assessed against a pre-defined pass/fail threshold, not through an adjudication process.
5. If a multi reader multi case (MRMC) comparative effectiveness study was done, If so, what was the effect size of how much human readers improve with AI vs without AI assistance
No. This device is an extraction bag, a physical surgical tool, not an AI-powered diagnostic or assistive tool for human readers. Therefore, an MRMC study comparing human reader performance with and without AI assistance is entirely irrelevant and was not conducted.
6. If a standalone (i.e. algorithm only without human-in-the loop performance) was done
No. This question applies to AI algorithms. As mentioned above, the device is a physical surgical tool, not an AI algorithm.
7. The type of ground truth used (expert consensus, pathology, outcomes data, etc)
For the non-clinical performance tests:
- Engineering specifications and recognized standards (e.g., criteria for what constitutes a "leak," a specified "rated volume," or a minimum "tensile strength").
- Biocompatibility standards (ISO 10993 series) define the ground truth for assessing non-toxic, non-irritating, and non-sensitizing properties of materials.
8. The sample size for the training set
Not applicable/Not provided. This question pertains to machine learning models. The Well Lead Extraction Bag is a physical device, so there is no "training set" in this context.
9. How the ground truth for the training set was established
Not applicable/Not provided. As there is no training set for this device, this question is irrelevant.
{0}------------------------------------------------
Image /page/0/Picture/1 description: The image shows the logo for the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services. The logo is circular, with the text "DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES - USA" arranged around the perimeter. Inside the circle is an abstract symbol consisting of three stylized human profiles facing to the right, with flowing lines beneath them.
Food and Drug Administration 10903 New Hampshire Avenue Document Control Center - WO66-G609 Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002
November 29, 2016
Well Lead Medical Co., Ltd. c/o Huang Kaigen Regulatory Affairs Manager C-4 # Jinhu Industrial Estate, Hualong, Panyu Guangzhou, 511434 CN
Re: K160801
Trade/Device Name: Well Lead Extraction Bag Regulation Number: 21 CFR 876.1500 Regulation Name: Endoscope and Accessories Regulatory Class: Class II Product Code: GCJ Dated: October 28, 2016 Received: October 31, 2016
Dear Huang Kaigen:
We have reviewed your Section 510(k) premarket notification of intent to market the device referenced above and have determined the device is substantially equivalent (for the indications for use stated in the enclosure) to legally marketed predicate devices marketed in interstate commerce prior to May 28, 1976, the enactment date of the Medical Device Amendments, or to devices that have been reclassified in accordance with the provisions of the Federal Food. Drug. and Cosmetic Act (Act) that do not require approval of a premarket approval application (PMA). You may, therefore, market the device, subject to the general controls provisions of the Act. The general controls provisions of the Act include requirements for annual registration, listing of devices, good manufacturing practice, labeling, and prohibitions against misbranding and adulteration. Please note: CDRH does not evaluate information related to contract liability warranties. We remind you, however, that device labeling must be truthful and not misleading.
If your device is classified (see above) into either class II (Special Controls) or class III (PMA), it may be subject to additional controls. Existing major regulations affecting your device can be found in the Code of Federal Regulations, Title 21, Parts 800 to 898. In addition, FDA may publish further announcements concerning your device in the Federal Register.
Please be advised that FDA's issuance of a substantial equivalence determination does not mean that FDA has made a determination that your device complies with other requirements of the Act or any Federal statutes and regulations administered by other Federal agencies. You must comply with all the Act's requirements, including, but not limited to: registration and listing (21 CFR Part 807); labeling (21 CFR Part 801); medical device reporting of medical devicerelated adverse events) (21 CFR 803); good manufacturing practice requirements as set forth in the quality systems (QS) regulation (21 CFR Part 820); and if applicable, the electronic product radiation control provisions (Sections 531-542 of the Act); 21 CFR 1000-1050.
{1}------------------------------------------------
If you desire specific advice for your device on our labeling regulation (21 CFR Part 801), please contact the Division of Industry and Consumer Education at its toll-free number (800) 638-2041 or (301) 796-7100 or at its Internet address
http://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/ResourcesforYou/Industry/default.htm. Also, please note the regulation entitled, "Misbranding by reference to premarket notification" (21 CFR Part 807.97). For questions regarding the reporting of adverse events under the MDR regulation (21 CFR Part 803), please go to
http://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/Safety/ReportaProblem/default.htm for the CDRH's Office of Surveillance and Biometrics/Division of Postmarket Surveillance.
You may obtain other general information on your responsibilities under the Act from the Division of Industry and Consumer Education at its toll-free number (800) 638-2041 or (301) 796-7100 or at its Internet address
http://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/ResourcesforYou/Industry/default.htm.
Sincerely yours,
Jennifer R. Stevenson -A
For Binita S. Ashar, M.D., M.B.A., F.A.C.S. Director Division of Surgical Devices Office of Device Evaluation Center for Devices and Radiological Health
Enclosure
{2}------------------------------------------------
K160801 510(k) Number (if known):
Device Name: Well Lead Extraction Bag
Indications for Use:
The Well Lead Extraction Bag is intended for use by qualified surgeons in tissue extraction procedures during laparoscopic surgery.
Prescription Use X (Part 21 CFR 801 Subpart D) OR
Over-The-Counter Use (Part 21 CFR 801 Subpart C)
(PLEASE DO NOT WRITE BELOW THIS LINE - CONTINUE ON ANOTHER PAGE IF NEEDED)
Concurrence of CDRH, Office of Device Evaluation (ODE)
{3}------------------------------------------------
510(k) Summary
In accordance with 21 CFR 807.92 the following summary of information is provided:
| Date: | 2016/10/26 |
|---|---|
| Submitter: | WELL LEAD MEDICAL CO., LTD.Address:C-4 # Jinhu Industrial Estate, Hualong,Panyu,Guangzhou, 511434, P.R. China |
| Contact Person: | Huang KaigenRegulatory Affairs ManagerWELL LEAD MEDICAL CO., LTD.Email: huangkg@welllead.com.cnTel: +86-20-84758878Fax:+86-20-84758224 |
| Device Name:Common Name:Regulation Number:Regulation Name:Product Code:Regulatory Class: | Well Lead Extraction BagExtraction Bag, Retrieval Bag21 CFR § 876.1500Endoscope and accessoriesGCJClass II |
| Predicate Device(s): | K013872-Rüsch Memory BagK132375-GENICON Single-Use Specimen Retrieval Bag |
1. Intended Use
The Well Lead Extraction Bag is intended for use by qualified surgeons in tissue extraction procedures during laparoscopic surgery.
2. Device Description
The Well Lead Extraction Bag is used for removal of tissue specimens during a suitable laparoscopic surgery.The device consists of a cylindrical sheath, a pusher and a polyurethane bag that minimizes spillage and intraoperative contamination by isolating and containing specimens. The bag is made of biocompatible high strength PU material, it is transparent and soft. which makes a qood visuality.
The device is composed of biologically safe materials. It is supplied sterile and intended for single use only. It's easy to enter, open, close and exit, higher efficiency, and different type and size available. It is offerd in 4 types: Type B, Type C, Type D and range in bag volume from 200ml for different surgery needs. The well thought-out rang of types and sizes are suitable for all laparoscopic procedures. The main differences between all types are the deployment system and operation method.
{4}------------------------------------------------
3. Substantial Equivalence-Comparison to Predicate Devices
※ Similarities Between Proposed and Predicate Devices
The proposed and predicate devices are both intended for tissue containment and removal during laparoscopic surgery. All devices are single use, sterile and offer two functional sections: a working section and a container section.
The proposed Well Lead Extraction Bag and the predicate devices, Rüsch Memory Bag, GENICON Single-Use Specimen Retrieval Bag, have the same intended use, principle of operation, patient population, performance characteristics and technological characteristics.
※ Differences Between Proposed and Predicate Devices
The following aspects involve slight differences between the proposed and predicate devices:
- Bag Volume
- · Materials
- · Deployment System
- · Mechanism of the bag opening
※ Summary and Conclusion
The Well Lead Extraction Bag described in this 510(k) has similar technological and performance characteristics to the predicate devices. The proposed device is substantially equivalent in intended use, principle of operation, patient population, performance characteristics and technological characteristics as to predicate devices. The differences in the device do not introduce new issues of safety and efficacy, or raise different questions of safety and effectiveness.
Therefore the proposed Well Lead Extraction Bag is substantially equivalent to Rüsch Memory Baq(K013872) and GENICON Single-Use Specimen Retrieval Bag(K132375).
4. Summary of Non-Clinical Performance Testing
The following performance testing was conducted for the Well Lead Extraction Bag:
- 1 ) General performance testing including:
- · Leakage
- Rated Volume
- · Tensile Strength
- · Determining the Dimensions
Testing datas and results are included in this submission, and demonstrated that the Well Lead Extraction Bag meets all the pre-determined testing and acceptance criteria.
- Biocompatibility testing as per ISO 10993-1:2009 including:
- · Cytotoxicity as per ISO 10993-5:2009
- · Irritation as per ISO 10993-10:2010
{5}------------------------------------------------
- · Sensitization as per ISO 10993-10:2010
Biocompatibility testing reports are included in this submission, and demonstrated that the device componets that are in contact with the patient are biocompatible.
5. Conclusion
The Well Lead Extraction Bag is substantially equivalent to predicate devices Rüsch Memory Bag(K013872) and GENICON Single-Use Specimen Retrieval Bag(K132375). Based on the intended use, principle of operation, patient population, performance characteristics, and technological characteristics, the proposed Well Lead Extraction Bag is substantially equivalent to and as safe and as effective as the legally marketed predicate devices.
§ 876.1500 Endoscope and accessories.
(a)
Identification. An endoscope and accessories is a device used to provide access, illumination, and allow observation or manipulation of body cavities, hollow organs, and canals. The device consists of various rigid or flexible instruments that are inserted into body spaces and may include an optical system for conveying an image to the user's eye and their accessories may assist in gaining access or increase the versatility and augment the capabilities of the devices. Examples of devices that are within this generic type of device include cleaning accessories for endoscopes, photographic accessories for endoscopes, nonpowered anoscopes, binolcular attachments for endoscopes, pocket battery boxes, flexible or rigid choledochoscopes, colonoscopes, diagnostic cystoscopes, cystourethroscopes, enteroscopes, esophagogastroduodenoscopes, rigid esophagoscopes, fiberoptic illuminators for endoscopes, incandescent endoscope lamps, biliary pancreatoscopes, proctoscopes, resectoscopes, nephroscopes, sigmoidoscopes, ureteroscopes, urethroscopes, endomagnetic retrievers, cytology brushes for endoscopes, and lubricating jelly for transurethral surgical instruments. This section does not apply to endoscopes that have specialized uses in other medical specialty areas and that are covered by classification regulations in other parts of the device classification regulations.(b)
Classification —(1)Class II (special controls). The device, when it is an endoscope disinfectant basin, which consists solely of a container that holds disinfectant and endoscopes and accessories; an endoscopic magnetic retriever intended for single use; sterile scissors for cystoscope intended for single use; a disposable, non-powered endoscopic grasping/cutting instrument intended for single use; a diagnostic incandescent light source; a fiberoptic photographic light source; a routine fiberoptic light source; an endoscopic sponge carrier; a xenon arc endoscope light source; an endoscope transformer; an LED light source; or a gastroenterology-urology endoscopic guidewire, is exempt from the premarket notification procedures in subpart E of part 807 of this chapter subject to the limitations in § 876.9.(2) Class I for the photographic accessories for endoscope, miscellaneous bulb adapter for endoscope, binocular attachment for endoscope, eyepiece attachment for prescription lens, teaching attachment, inflation bulb, measuring device for panendoscope, photographic equipment for physiologic function monitor, special lens instrument for endoscope, smoke removal tube, rechargeable battery box, pocket battery box, bite block for endoscope, and cleaning brush for endoscope. The devices subject to this paragraph (b)(2) are exempt from the premarket notification procedures in subpart E of part 807of this chapter, subject to the limitations in § 876.9.