LogoFDA 510(k) Search
K Number
K973722
Device Name
BIONECT HYDROGEL FOAM
Manufacturer
FIDIA PHARMACEUTICAL CORP.
Date Cleared
1998-09-22

(357 days)

Product Code
MGQ
Regulation Number
N/A
Type
Traditional
Panel
SU
Reference & Predicate Devices
N/A
AI/MLSaMDIVD (In Vitro Diagnostic)TherapeuticDiagnosticis PCCP AuthorizedThirdpartyExpeditedreview
Intended Use

BIONECT® Hydrogel Foam is indicated for the dressing and management of partial to full thickness dermal ulcers (pressure sores, venous stasis ulcers, arterial ulcers, diabetic ulcers), wounds including cuts, abrasions, donor sites, and post-operative incisions, irritations of the skin, and first and second degree burns.

Device Description

BIONECT® Hydrogel Foam is a white foam that is prepared from sodium hyaluronate and purified water to form a hydrogel dressing. BIONECT® Hydrogel Foam, since it is a hydrogel dressing, provides a soothing, moist environment that is supportive to wound healing.

AI/ML Overview

The provided text is a 510(k) Premarket Notification for BIONECT® Hydrogel Foam and does not contain information about acceptance criteria or a study designed to prove the device meets specific performance criteria.

The document primarily focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence to a predicate device (BIONECT® Hydrogel) by comparing technological characteristics, intended use, and providing a summary of prior biocompatibility testing and clinical experience.

Here's a breakdown of what is and is not in the document, based on your request:

What IS in the document:

  • BIONECT® Hydrogel Foam Device Description: It's a white foam prepared from sodium hyaluronate and purified water, designed to provide a soothing, moist environment for wound healing.
  • Intended Use: Dressing and management of partial to full thickness dermal ulcers, various wounds (cuts, abrasions, donor sites, post-operative incisions), skin irritations, and first and second-degree burns.
  • Predicate Device: BIONECT® Hydrogel.
  • Biocompatibility Testing: In vitro and in vivo testing (cytotoxicity, dermal irritation, dermal sensitization) was performed on the bulk solution in accordance with FDA recommendations (ISO-10993). These tests supported safe use. This is a type of performance data, but not framed as meeting specific numerical acceptance criteria.
  • Clinical Experience (for predicate device/similar products): "Clinical experience with BIONECT® Hydrogel and BIONECT® Hydrogel Gauze Pads in 22 clinical trials (17 controlled) conducted in Europe in patients with various types of ulcers, burns, and surgical wounds indicates that BIONECT® Hydrogel Foam is safe for its intended use." This is a statement of safety based on past clinical use, but lacks specific statistical performance metrics for the proposed device.
  • FDA Clearance: The FDA found the device substantially equivalent to a legally marketed predicate device, with specific limitations on labeling (e.g., not for third-degree burns, no claims of accelerating wound healing).

What IS NOT (or not sufficiently) in the document to fulfill your request:

  1. A table of acceptance criteria and the reported device performance: No specific, quantifiable acceptance criteria (e.g., "must demonstrate a 90% wound closure rate by X weeks") are listed, nor are numerical performance results against such criteria. The document relies on substantial equivalence and a general statement of safety from prior clinical experience.
  2. Sample size used for the test set and the data provenance: The document mentions "22 clinical trials (17 controlled) conducted in Europe" for related products (BIONECT® Hydrogel and BIONECT® Hydrogel Gauze Pads). This is a general reference to support safety for the intended use of the new foam, not a specific "test set" for the foam itself with detailed provenance.
  3. Number of experts used to establish the ground truth for the test set and the qualifications of those experts: Not applicable, as there isn't a described "test set" with ground truth established by experts in the context of device performance metrics.
  4. Adjudication method for the test set: Not applicable.
  5. If a multi-reader multi-case (MRMC) comparative effectiveness study was done, and effect size: Not applicable, as this device is not an imaging or diagnostic AI device. The document describes a medical dressing.
  6. If a standalone performance study was done: The biocompatibility tests are standalone performance tests for material safety, but not for its clinical efficacy in wound healing against specific benchmarks. The clinical experience refers to related products.
  7. The type of ground truth used: Not applicable in the context of quantitative performance ground truth, but implicitly, "safety for its intended use" from clinical trials would have relied on physician assessments of patient outcomes.
  8. The sample size for the training set: Not applicable, as this is a medical device (hydrogel foam), not an AI algorithm requiring a training set.
  9. How the ground truth for the training set was established: Not applicable.

In summary, the provided submission (K973722) for BIONECT® Hydrogel Foam focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence to a predicate device and relies on prior biocompatibility testing and general clinical experience with similar hydrogel products to assert its safety and intended use, rather than presenting a study with specific, quantifiable acceptance criteria and performance data for the device itself.

N/A