Search Filters

Search Results

Found 1 results

510(k) Data Aggregation

    K Number
    K121976
    Manufacturer
    Date Cleared
    2013-05-17

    (316 days)

    Product Code
    Regulation Number
    878.4010
    Reference & Predicate Devices
    Why did this record match?
    Device Name :

    AESCULAP HISTOACRYL FLEXIBLE TOPICAL SKIN ADHESIVE

    AI/MLSaMDIVD (In Vitro Diagnostic)TherapeuticDiagnosticis PCCP AuthorizedThirdpartyExpeditedreview
    Intended Use

    Histoacryl Flexible topical skin adhesive is intended for topical application to hold closed easily approximated skin edges of minimum-tension wounds from clean surgical incisions and simple, thoroughly cleansed, trauma-induced lacerations. Histoacryl Flexible may be used in conjunction with, but not in place of, deep dermal sutures.

    Device Description

    Histoacryl Flexible Topical Skin Adhesive is a sterile liquid topical skin adhesive composed of n-butyl-2-cyanoacrylate monomer, softener, stabilizer, and colorant (D&C Violet #2). It is provided in 0:5 ml single patient use plastic ampoules. Each ampoule is sealed within a foil pouch so the exterior of the ampoule can remain sterile. The tissue adhesives remain liquid until exposed to water or water-containing substances including tissue, after which it cures (polymerizes) and forms a film that bonds to the underlying surface.

    AI/ML Overview

    Here's an analysis of the provided text regarding the Histoacryl Flexible Topical Skin Adhesive, focusing on acceptance criteria and supporting studies:

    This document describes a 510(k) submission for a medical device seeking substantial equivalence to existing predicate devices, rather than a clinical trial proving a device meets specific clinical performance acceptance criteria in a comparative effectiveness study. Therefore, many of the requested categories (like MRMC study effect size, sample sizes for test/training sets, or number/qualifications of experts) are not applicable or explicitly stated in this type of submission. The "acceptance criteria" here refer to demonstrating performance equivalent to predicate devices through non-clinical testing.


    Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

    1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance:

    Acceptance Criteria CategorySpecific Test/StandardAcceptance Condition (Implicit)Reported Device Performance (Summary)
    Mechanical PerformanceLap Shear StrengthSubstantially equivalent to predicatesDemonstrated substantially equivalent performance (comparative testing)
    Peel Adhesion StrengthSubstantially equivalent to predicatesDemonstrated substantially equivalent performance (comparative testing)
    Impact StrengthSubstantially equivalent to predicatesDemonstrated substantially equivalent performance (comparative testing)
    Material PropertiesSet (Polymerization) TimeSubstantially equivalent to predicatesDemonstrated substantially equivalent performance (comparative testing)
    Heat of PolymerizationSubstantially equivalent to predicatesDemonstrated substantially equivalent performance (comparative testing)
    ViscositySubstantially equivalent to predicatesDemonstrated substantially equivalent performance (comparative testing)
    GC Chemical AnalysisSubstantially equivalent to predicatesDemonstrated substantially equivalent performance (comparative testing)
    Hydrolytic DegradationSubstantially equivalent to predicatesDemonstrated substantially equivalent performance (comparative testing)
    Handling CharacteristicsEase of ExpressionSubstantially equivalent to predicatesDemonstrated substantially equivalent performance (comparative testing)
    BiocompatibilityMEM CytotoxicityPass (non-toxic)Results provide evidence Histoacryl Flexible is safe and biocompatible
    Intracutaneous ReactivityPass (non-reactive)Results provide evidence Histoacryl Flexible is safe and biocompatible
    Maximization SensitizationPass (non-sensitizing)Results provide evidence Histoacryl Flexible is safe and biocompatible
    Systemic ToxicityPass (non-toxic)Results provide evidence Histoacryl Flexible is safe and biocompatible
    Muscle ImplantationPass (acceptable tissue response)Results provide evidence Histoacryl Flexible is safe and biocompatible
    Microbial BarrierMicrobial Barrier Test (Strike Through Test with specific organisms)Barrier maintainedBarrier maintained as long as the adhesive film remains intact.
    Sterilization & Shelf-LifeSterilization efficacy (ETO & Gamma)Effective sterilizationSterilization is the same as predicate (ETO ampoule, gamma pouch); sterility of liquid by membrane filtration/aseptic filling.
    Shelf-Life (Real-time data)Stable for specified durationCurrent data supports a 24-month shelf life.

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

    • Sample Size for Test Set: Not explicitly stated for any of the performance tests (e.g., lap shear, peel adhesion). This type of submission usually focuses on demonstrating equivalence through comparative testing rather than proving a specific performance target with a statistically powered clinical sample.
    • Data Provenance: The tests are in-vitro ("In vitro studies have shown...") or non-clinical laboratory tests. No information suggests country of origin for data as it's not clinical patient data. The manufacturer is Aesculap, Inc. based in Center Valley, PA, USA. The tests were performed "in accordance to FDA's Class II Special Control Guidance Document for Tissue Adhesive."

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

    • Not applicable. This submission relies on objective, standardized laboratory test methods (e.g., ASTM standards like F2255-05, F2256-05, F2458-05, and ISO 10993 for biocompatibility) to establish performance characteristics, not expert consensus or ground truth derived from clinical interpretation.

    4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set:

    • Not applicable. See point 3. Testing is based on established protocols and measurements, not subjective adjudication.

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

    • No. An MRMC comparative effectiveness study was not done. This is a 510(k) premarket notification for a Class II medical device, primarily demonstrating substantial equivalence through non-clinical performance and biocompatibility testing, not human clinical comparative efficacy in a reader study scenario.

    6. If a Standalone (i.e., algorithm only without human-in-the-loop performance) Was Done:

    • Not applicable. This device is a physical topical skin adhesive, not an algorithm or AI system.

    7. The Type of Ground Truth Used:

    • The "ground truth" for the performance tests is based on standardized test methods and measurements (e.g., ASTM and ISO standards for mechanical properties, material characteristics, and biocompatibility). For substantial equivalence, the "truth" is that its performance metrics fall within an acceptable range compared to the predicate devices.

    8. The Sample Size for the Training Set:

    • Not applicable. This device does not involve machine learning or AI, so there is no concept of a "training set."

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

    • Not applicable. See point 8.
    Ask a Question

    Ask a specific question about this device

    Page 1 of 1