Search Results

Antibacterial bandages are to be applied topically to the skin to help prevent infection in minor cuts, scrapes and burns.

Not Found

This document is an FDA 510(k) clearance letter for the Curad Antibacterial Bandage. It does not contain information on acceptance criteria or a study proving the device meets acceptance criteria. The letter confirms that the device is substantially equivalent to legally marketed predicate devices.

Therefore, I cannot extract the requested information from this document.

Ask a specific question about this device

The Curad Compression Hosiery is intended for use in helping prevent edema and leg discomfort, and helping prevent deep vein thrombosis (DVT) in individuals subjected to immobility.

15-20mmHg: Helps to prevent edema and leg discomfort, and helps to prevent deep vein thrombosis (DVT) in individuals subjected to immobility. Especially for long distance travelers and those on their feet for extended periods of time.

20-30mmHg: Helps to prevent the pooling of blood in the legs and apply controlled pressure to the legs.

30-40mmHg: Helps to prevent edema and leg discomfort and helps to prevent deep vein thrombosis.

Not Found

The provided text is a 510(k) clearance letter for the Curad® Compression Hosiery. It does not contain information about the acceptance criteria or a study proving the device meets those criteria. The letter primarily confirms that the device is substantially equivalent to a legally marketed predicate device based on its indications for use.

Therefore, I cannot provide the requested information. The document focuses on regulatory clearance, not a performance study with detailed acceptance criteria and results.

Ask a specific question about this device

The intended use is as a wound dressing layer for skin graft recipient sites, newly sutured wounds, abrasions, lacerations and minor or partial thickness burns. These dressings may also be used as an initial layer for wounds with light exudates where deodorization is desired.

These dressings are intended for use as a primary layer for donor sites, skin graft recipient sites and minor burus. These dressings may also be used as an initial layer for surgical incision sites and as a seal around tubes and drains exiting the body.

These dressings are intended for use as a primary dressing in the management of light to medium draining wounds such as minor burns, abrasions and lacerations. These dressings may also be used under the care of a health care professional for heavy draining wounds such as surgical incisions, skin grafts and dermal ulcers.

Not Found

I am sorry, but the provided text is a 510(k) premarket notification decision letter from the FDA for several wound dressings (Medline Curad Oil Emulsion Dressing, Medline Curad Xeroform Petrolatum Dressing, and Medline Curad Petrolatum Gauze Dressing).

This document does not contain any information about acceptance criteria for a device, a study that proves a device meets acceptance criteria, or any details related to AI, algorithms, or ground truth establishment. The letter is purely an administrative notification of the substantial equivalence determination for the medical devices listed, based on their intended use.

Therefore, I cannot extract the information requested in your prompt from this document.

Ask a specific question about this device

The CURAD® Silver Gel Bandage is indicated for first aid to help in minor abrasions, cuts, lacerations, scrapes, and scalds.

The CURAD® Silver Active Gel Bandage is a polyurethane occlusive bandage that includes silver oxide in the polyurethane matrix. The polyurethane provides a moist healing environment. At the same time, silver ions reduce bacterial growth in the wound pad.

The provided text describes the 510(k) submission for the CURAD® Silver Active Gel Bandage. Here's an analysis of the acceptance criteria and the study conducted based on the given information:

Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

Note: The document states that the CURAD® Silver Active Gel Bandage was tested for "silver release and antimicrobial effect and was demonstrated to have acceptable results." Additionally, a "biocompatibility assessment was performed... with satisfactory results." Specific quantitative thresholds for "acceptable" and "satisfactory" are not provided in the summary.

Study Details

1. Sample Size used for the test set and the data provenance:
   The document does not specify the sample size used for the performance tests (silver release, antimicrobial effect, and biocompatibility). It also does not mention the data provenance in terms of country of origin or whether the studies were retrospective or prospective.

2. Number of experts used to establish the ground truth for the test set and the qualifications of those experts:
   This information is not applicable and not provided in the context of the performance testing for a wound dressing. Performance tests for silver release, antimicrobial effect, and biocompatibility typically involve laboratory assays and standardized protocols, not expert interpretation of diagnostic images or clinical data.

3. Adjudication method for the test set:
   Not applicable (see point 2).

4. 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:
   Not applicable. This device is a wound dressing, not an AI-powered diagnostic tool requiring human reader studies.

5. If a standalone (i.e. algorithm only without human-in-the-loop performance) was done:
   Not applicable. This is not an algorithm-based device. The performance testing was for the intrinsic properties of the wound dressing.

6. The type of ground truth used:
   The "ground truth" for this type of device would be established through laboratory measurements and standardized testing protocols for silver release, antimicrobial efficacy, and biocompatibility, as per relevant ISO standards or FDA guidance for wound dressings. The summary does not provide specific details on these protocols but states that results were "acceptable" and "satisfactory."

7. The sample size for the training set:
   Not applicable. This device is not an AI/ML product developed with a training set.

8. How the ground truth for the training set was established:
   Not applicable. This device is not an AI/ML product developed with a training set.

Ask a specific question about this device

The CURAD® Silver Bandage is indicated for first aid to help in minor abrasions, cuts, lacerations, scrapes, and scalds.

The CURAD® Silver Bandage is an adhesive bandage that includes silver in the wound pad. The bandage covers the wound to create a protected environment. At the same time, silver ions reduce bacterial growth in the wound pad.

The provided text describes a 510(k) premarket notification for the CURAD® Silver Bandage, which is an adhesive bandage containing silver in its wound pad. The purpose of the submission is to demonstrate substantial equivalence to legally marketed predicate devices.

However, the provided document does not contain a detailed study proving the device meets specific acceptance criteria in the format requested. Instead, it refers to general performance testing.

Here's a breakdown of the information presented, highlighting why a full acceptance criteria study cannot be extracted as requested:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance:

The document states:

• Missing Details: The document does not specify the quantitative or qualitative "acceptance criteria" for "acceptable" or "satisfactory" in terms of silver release, antimicrobial effect, or biocompatibility. It also does not provide the specific numerical results obtained during testing.

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

The document does not provide information on the sample size used for the test set or the data provenance (e.g., country of origin, retrospective/prospective) for any of its performance testing.

3. Number of Experts and Qualifications:

The document does not provide information on the number of experts used to establish ground truth or their qualifications. This is not typically part of a 510(k) submission for this type of device, which focuses on device performance rather than interpretation of complex medical images or data by experts.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set:

The document does not provide information on any adjudication method.

5. Multi-Reader Multi-Case (MRMC) Comparative Effectiveness Study:

The document does not mention a multi-reader multi-case (MRMC) comparative effectiveness study. This type of study is more relevant for diagnostic imaging devices where human interpretation is a key factor.

6. Standalone (Algorithm Only) Performance:

The document does not describe any standalone (algorithm only) performance. This device is a physical product, not an algorithm.

7. Type of Ground Truth Used:

For the performance testing mentioned (silver release, antimicrobial effect, biocompatibility), the "ground truth" would be established through laboratory testing and established scientific standards/methods for measuring these properties. The specific details of these methods are not provided in this 510(k) summary.

8. Sample Size for the Training Set:

The concept of a "training set" is not applicable to this physical medical device. This term is used for machine learning algorithms.

9. How Ground Truth for Training Set Was Established:

Not applicable, as there is no "training set" for this device.

In summary, the provided 510(k) summary for the CURAD® Silver Bandage indicates that performance testing for silver release, antimicrobial effect, and biocompatibility was conducted and yielded "acceptable" or "satisfactory" results. However, it lacks the detailed quantitative acceptance criteria, specific study designs, sample sizes, and expert involvement that would be present in a comprehensive study report for certain types of medical devices, particularly those involving diagnostics or complex algorithms. The submission aims to demonstrate substantial equivalence to existing predicate devices based on technological characteristics and general performance, rather than providing detailed clinical trial data with expert agreement and specific statistical metrics often seen for higher-risk devices or software as a medical device.

Ask a specific question about this device

Intended for the management of hypertrophic and keloid scars. May be used as prophylactic therapy on closed wounds which may prevent hypertrophic and keloid scarring.

Curad® Scar Therapy is a semi-occlusive, flexible pad for the management of hypertrophic scars resulting from burns, surgery, or injuries, after complete healing. The device is also intended for management of keloid scars. It may be used as a prophylactic therapy on closed wounds which may prevent hypertrophic and keloid scarring. It is intended for over-the-counter use.

Curad® Scar Therapy consists of an adhesive aliphatic polyurethane matrix. Embedded in this matrix are absorbent sodium polyacrylate particles. The product has a waterproof polyurethane film that is permeable to oxygen and water vapor.

The Curad® Scar Therapy pads are individually sealed in envelopes and packaged in cartons of 21 pads. The size of the pads is 7x4 cm. The pad is intended to be exchanged daily for a new pad, and may remain in place 24 hours a day. Treatment should consist of at least 12 hours a day for at least eight weeks.

Here's an analysis of the provided text regarding the acceptance criteria and study for the Curad® Scar Therapy device, structured according to your request:

Device: Curad® Scar Therapy

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

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

The provided 510(k) summary does not explicitly state the sample size used for the efficacy clinical studies or the data provenance (country of origin, retrospective/prospective). It only makes a general statement about "Clinical studies".

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

The document does not provide information on the number or qualifications of experts used to establish ground truth for the clinical studies. Given the nature of scar assessment, it is likely that clinicians (e.g., dermatologists, plastic surgeons) would have been involved, but this is not specified.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set

The document does not specify any adjudication method used for the clinical studies.

5. If a Multi-Reader Multi-Case (MRMC) Comparative Effectiveness Study Was Done, and the Effect Size

The document does not mention an MRMC comparative effectiveness study or any effect size related to human reader improvement with or without AI assistance. This device is a topical medical device, not an AI-powered diagnostic tool, so an MRMC study would generally not be applicable.

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

This question is not applicable as the device is a physical scar therapy pad and does not involve an algorithm or AI.

7. The Type of Ground Truth Used

Based on "Clinical studies have demonstrated that Curad® Scar Therapy is as effective as the Mepiform in the management and reduction of hypertrophic and keloid scars," the ground truth for efficacy would likely be based on clinical assessment of scar appearance and characteristics by medical professionals. This could involve subjective ratings (e.g., Vancouver Scar Scale, patient satisfaction) or objective measurements (though not specified). It is not pathology or direct outcomes data in the sense of mortality or disease progression, but rather clinical improvement in a visible condition.

8. The Sample Size for the Training Set

This question is not applicable as the device is a physical scar therapy pad and does not involve AI or machine learning models that require a "training set."

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

This question is not applicable for the same reason as point 8.

Summary of Study Information Provided in the 510(k):

The 510(k) summary for Curad® Scar Therapy relies on demonstrating substantial equivalence to predicate devices (Cutinova®thin Wound Dressing and Mepiform Adherent Silicone Dressing).

• Safety: Demonstrated through "biocompatibility studies and long-term use" of the device's polyurethane pad, claiming it "does not raise new issues of safety" since it's applied only to intact skin.
• Efficacy: Stated that "Clinical studies have demonstrated that Curad® Scar Therapy is as effective as the Mepiform in the management and reduction of hypertrophic and keloid scars," implying a comparative clinical study against the Mepiform predicate. However, specific details about these clinical studies (e.g., sample size, methodology, endpoints, blinding) are not provided in this summary document. The submission is primarily focused on asserting equivalence rather than detailing the full clinical study report.

Ask a specific question about this device

CURAD® Spray Bandage is indicated for providing a covering over minor cuts and scrapes that are clean and dry.

The product is packaged in a pressurized can. The can is held about 5 inches from affected area, and a light coat is sprayed onto the skin. CURAD® Spray Bandage typically dries in 2-3 minutes. Once dried, additional coats can be applied, if needed.

CURAD® Spray Bandage will typically adhere for several days before losing its adhesive strength. To remove it before it has lost its adhesive strength, the user can apply isopropyl alcohol to the bandage to dissolve it.

CURAD® Spray Bandage is composed of the following ingredients:

poly(methylacrylate-isobutene-monoisopropylmaleate), ethyl acetate, npentane, carbon dioxide, menthol

Here's an analysis of the provided text regarding the CURAD® Spray Bandage's acceptance criteria and studies, organized as requested:

Acceptance Criteria and Study for CURAD® Spray Bandage

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

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

The provided 510(k) summary does not explicitly state the sample size used for the test set for any of the performance claims. It also does not specify the data provenance (e.g., country of origin, retrospective/prospective). The document states that "A summary of testing to support each of these claims has been established and verified," implying that tests were conducted, but the details are omitted.

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

The provided 510(k) summary does not mention the use of experts to establish ground truth for the test set. The performance claims appear to be based on physical/material property testing rather than expert-derived diagnoses or assessments.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set

Since the ground truth appears to be based on objective physical/material property testing rather than expert consensus on subjective assessments, an adjudication method for a test set is not applicable and not mentioned in the document.

5. Multi-Reader Multi-Case (MRMC) Comparative Effectiveness Study

A Multi-Reader Multi-Case (MRMC) comparative effectiveness study was not conducted or described in the provided document. The device in question is a liquid bandage, and the performance claims relate to its physical properties, not diagnostic accuracy where human readers would typically be involved.

6. Standalone (Algorithm Only Without Human-in-the-Loop Performance) Study

This concept is not applicable to this device. The CURAD® Spray Bandage is a physical product, not a software algorithm that performs diagnostic or analytical tasks. Therefore, a "standalone algorithm performance" study was not conducted.

7. Type of Ground Truth Used

The ground truth used for the performance claims appears to be based on objective physical and material property measurements/testing. Examples include evaluating flexibility, transparency, water-tightness, water vapor permeability, germ sealing capability, drying time, adhesion duration, and biocompatibility.

8. Sample Size for the Training Set

There is no mention of a "training set" in the context of this device. A training set is typically associated with machine learning algorithms, which are not relevant to the CURAD® Spray Bandage.

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

Since there is no training set for this device, the question of how its ground truth was established is not applicable.

Ask a specific question about this device