Search Results

The Bardex® Lubri-Sil™ I.C. Foley Catheter is indicated for use in the drainage and/or collection and/or measurement of urine. Generally, drainage is accomplished by inserting the catheter through the urethra and into the bladder. However, drainage is sometimes accomplished by suprapubic or other placement of the catheter, such as a nephrostomy tract.

Some Foley catheters, especially those with larger (30cc) balloons are used to assist in hemostasis following surgery such as transurethral resection of the prostate.

The Bardex® Lubri-Sil™ I.C. Foley Catheter is a two-way all-silicone Foley catheter with silver and lubricious hydrophilic coatings.

The Bard Lubri-Sil I. C. Foley Catheter is constructed of high grade extruded clear silicone rubber with a molded tip and funnel. It is a twolumen catheter with a drainage lumen and an inflation lumen with two-way valve. A silver coating and then a hydrophilic polymeric coating are applied to the finished catheter. The hydrophilic coating becomes very slippery when wet. The silver coating discourages bacterial adhesion to the catheter surface. The Lubri-Sil I.C. Foley Catheter is available in even shaft sizes 12-24 Fr. with a 5cc balloon and in even shaft sizes 16-24 Fr. with a 30cc balloon.

I am unable to answer your request with the provided information. The text describes a medical device, the Bardex® Lubri-Sil™ I.C. Foley Catheter, its intended use, technological characteristics, and performance data. It also includes an FDA 510(k) clearance letter.

However, the provided text does not contain the specific details required to complete the table and answer all the questions in your prompt, particularly regarding "acceptance criteria" versus "performance requirements," sample sizes for test/training sets, data provenance, expert qualifications, adjudication methods, MRMC studies, or how ground truth was established if it were a diagnostic AI device.

The document details performance requirements and states the device "meets" them, but these are not explicitly presented as "acceptance criteria" with numerical targets and reported device performance values in a comparative table as requested. It also describes "performance data" and "testing" but lacks the granular information about study design, sample sizes, and ground truth establishment typically associated with the type of request you've made for an AI/diagnostic device.

The provided document describes a Foley Catheter, which is a physical medical device for drainage, not a diagnostic AI device that would typically have "test sets," "training sets," "ground truth," "experts," or "MRMC studies" in the context you've outlined.

Therefore, to answer your request accurately, I would need a different type of document that describes the acceptance criteria and study detailed for a diagnostic AI device, rather than a physical medical device like a Foley Catheter.

Ask a specific question about this device

The Bardex® Lubri-Sil™ Foley Catheter is indicated for use in the drainage and/or collection and/or measurement of urine. Generally, drainage is accomplished by inserting the catheter through the urethra and into the bladder. However, drainage is sometimes accomplished by suprapubic or other placement of the catheter, such as a nephrostomy tract.

Some Foley catheters, especially those with larger (30cc) balloons are used to assist in hemostasis following surgery such as transurethral resection of the prostate.

The Bardex® Lubri-Sil™ Foley Catheter is a two-way all-silicone Foley catheter with a lubricious hydrophilic coating.

The Bard Lubri-Sil Foley Catheter is constructed of high grade extruded clear silicone rubber with a molded tip and funnel. It is a two-lumen catheter with a drainage lumen and an inflation lumen with two-way valve. A hydrophilic polymeric coating is applied to the finished catheter. This coating becomes very slippery when wet. The Lubri-Sil Foley Catheter is available in shaft sizes 8 and 10 Fr. with a 3cc balloon, in even shaft sizes 12-24 Fr. with a 5cc balloon and in even shaft sizes 16-24 Fr. with a 30cc balloon.

The provided text describes the Bardex® Lubri-Sil™ Foley Catheter, its intended use, and performance data, but it does not describe a study involving an AI device or software. Therefore, many of the requested sections about AI-specific criteria, sample sizes for AI models, expert adjudication, or MRMC studies cannot be answered from the provided document as they are not applicable.

The document focuses on the physical and biocompatibility performance of a medical device (a Foley catheter) against established standards and internal criteria.

Here's a breakdown of the information that can be extracted from the provided text, adapted to the questions where possible:

Acceptance Criteria and Device Performance for Bardex® Lubri-Sil™ Foley Catheter

The Bardex® Lubri-Sil™ Foley Catheter is a medical device, not an AI or software device. The acceptance criteria and performance data pertain to its physical and biological characteristics.

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

The document states that the Bard Lubri-Sil Foley Catheter "meets the following performance requirements per testing conducted according to ASTM F 623-89, when appropriate, and/or Bard testing/acceptance criteria." Specific numerical performance results or explicit acceptance thresholds are not provided in the document for each criterion, only that the device "meets" them.

2. Sample Size Used for the Test Set and Data Provenance

The document does not specify sample sizes for each test conducted for the catheter's physical performance or biocompatibility. The tests are described as "Bard testing/acceptance criteria" and "testing conducted according to ASTM F 623-89" and "biocompatibility testing per ISO 10993-1." The provenance of the data is implicitly internal testing conducted by C. R. Bard, Inc. (USA). The data would be prospective in the sense that the tests were performed to evaluate the manufactured device against specified criteria.

3. Number of Experts Used to Establish Ground Truth and Qualifications

Not applicable. This device is a physical medical device, not an AI or diagnostic tool requiring expert ground truth for its performance evaluation in the context described. Its performance is evaluated through engineering and biocompatibility tests.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set

Not applicable. As this is not an AI or diagnostic study, an adjudication method in the sense of resolving conflicting expert opinions is not relevant. Performance is determined by meeting objective engineering and biological test specifications.

5. If a Multi-Reader Multi-Case (MRMC) Comparative Effectiveness Study Was Done

No. An MRMC study is relevant for diagnostic systems where human readers interpret medical images or data. This document describes a physical medical device.

6. If a Standalone (Algorithm Only Without Human-in-the-Loop Performance) Was Done

No. This is not an algorithm or AI device.

7. The Type of Ground Truth Used

For the physical and performance tests (e.g., flow rate, balloon integrity, tensile strength), the "ground truth" would be the objective measurement against established engineering standards (ASTM F 623-89) and internal Bard specifications. For biocompatibility, the "ground truth" is determined by established biological safety standards (ISO 10993-1) for cytotoxicity, systemic toxicity, etc. There is no "expert consensus" or "pathology" in the typical sense for these types of device performance evaluations.

8. The Sample Size for the Training Set

Not applicable. This is not an AI or machine learning model that requires a training set.

9. How the Ground Truth for the Training Set Was Established

Not applicable. This is not an AI or machine learning model.

Ask a specific question about this device

The Bard® Flexible Endoscopy Injection System is indicated as an accessory for currently available endoscopes to provide for delivery of injectable materials into tissues in the urinary bladder and lower urinary tract via percutaneous access through a pre-placed 20 Fr. (minimum) introducer. The system is designed for use with flexible endoscopes no larger than 18 Fr. and having a working channel accommodating 5 Fr. instrumentation.

The Bard® Flexible Endoscopy Injection System consists of an endoscopic injection needle with an endoscopic working channel protector, a stainless steel endoscopic stabilizer sheath and optional medical tape for affixation purposes.

Here's an analysis of the provided text, focusing on acceptance criteria and study details. Please note that the document is a 510(k) summary from 1997 for a medical device (Bard Flexible Endoscopy Injection System), which typically focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence to a predicate device rather than comprehensive clinical trial data with acceptance criteria in the modern sense. Therefore, some of the requested information (like specific performance metrics, sample sizes for test sets, expert qualifications, MRMC studies, standalone performance, and large-scale training sets) is not present in this type of submission.

Summary of Findings from the Document:

The provided document describes a Bard Flexible Endoscopy Injection System as an accessory for endoscopes, used to deliver injectable materials into tissues in the urinary bladder and lower urinary tract. The primary goal of the 510(k) submission is to demonstrate that this new device is substantially equivalent to a previously cleared predicate device, the Bard Endoscopic Injection System (#K933815).

The acceptance criteria in this context are not explicitly stated as quantitative performance targets with thresholds (e.g., "sensitivity must be >90%"). Instead, the "acceptance criteria" are implied through the comparison of the new device's technological characteristics to those of the predicate device, aiming to show that the differences do not raise new questions of safety or effectiveness. The "study" proving acceptance is the comparison to the predicate device through a detailed feature analysis rather than a clinical trial.

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

As mentioned, the acceptance criteria are not in a traditional quantitative format for AI/software, but rather a demonstration of similarity to a predicate device.

2. Sample Size Used for the Test Set and Data Provenance

• Sample Size: Not applicable in the traditional sense for this type of submission. There is no mention of a "test set" of specific cases or patients for evaluating performance metrics. The "test" is the comparison of technical specifications to the predicate device.
• Data Provenance: Not applicable. The data is a comparison of design specifications.

3. Number of Experts Used to Establish the Ground Truth for the Test Set and Qualifications of Those Experts

• This information is not provided. The "ground truth" here is the established safety and effectiveness of the predicate device, and the comparison is based on engineering specifications rather than expert consensus on a test set.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set

• Not applicable. There was no test set requiring expert adjudication.

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 MRMC study was done. This document is for a mechanical medical device, not an AI or imaging diagnostic tool.

6. If a Standalone (i.e., algorithm only without human-in-the-loop performance) was done

• Not applicable. This is not an algorithm.

7. The type of ground truth used (expert consensus, pathology, outcomes data, etc.)

• The "ground truth" used for this submission is implicitly the established safety and effectiveness profile of the predicate device (#K933815 Bard® Endoscopic Injection System), which had presumably undergone its own regulatory clearance based on testing and/or comparison to even earlier devices. The new device's compliance with material standards (e.g., USP Class VI Polymer) also serves as a form of ground 'truth' for material safety.

8. The Sample Size for the Training Set

• Not applicable. This is not an AI/machine learning device requiring a training set.

9. How the Ground Truth for the Training Set was Established

• Not applicable. There is no training set.

Ask a specific question about this device