Search Results

MANUKAtex wound dressings are sterile, single-use wound care dressings for use in moist wound management. MANUKAtex wound dressings may be used Over-The-Counter for:

Minor Abrasions
Lacerations
Minor Cuts
Minor Scalds and Burns
Under the supervision of a healthcare professional, MANUKAtex wound dressings may be used for:
Leg Ulcers
Pressure Ulcers
1st and 2nd Degree Burns (Superficial and Partial Thickness)
Diabetic Foot Ulcers
Surgical Wounds
Traumatic Wounds

MANUKAtex wound dressings are sterile, single-use wound care dressings for use in moist wound management. The primary device is Leptospermum scoparium honey from New Zealand impregnated into acetate gauze. MANUKAtex is coated with carboxymethyl cellulose (CMC). The device incorporates 100% active Leptospermum scoparium medical grade Manuka honey that is harvested and processed under controlled conditions.

The provided text is a 510(k) summary for the MANUKAtex wound dressing. It focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence to predicate devices and detailing non-clinical testing for biocompatibility.

Here's an analysis of the document in relation to your request about acceptance criteria and study details, highlighting what information is present and what is missing:

1. A table of acceptance criteria and the reported device performance

Missing Information: The document states that "all acceptance criteria were met for all tests conducted," but does not explicitly list the specific quantitative or qualitative acceptance criteria for each test (e.g., specific limits for cytotoxicity, or pass/fail conditions for wound healing studies).

2. Sample size used for the test set and the data provenance

Missing Information: The document states that "Standard biocompatibility tests were performed…wound healing studies" but does not specify the sample size for any of these tests. It also does not mention data provenance (e.g., country of origin of data, retrospective or prospective).

3. Number of experts used to establish the ground truth for the test set and the qualifications of those experts

Missing Information: This information is not applicable as the studies described are non-clinical (biocompatibility, sterilization, shelf-life, packaging validation) and do not involve human expert assessment for ground truth.

4. Adjudication method (e.g. 2+1, 3+1, none) for the test set

Missing Information: This information is not applicable as the studies described are non-clinical.

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

Missing Information: This information is not applicable. The device is a wound dressing, not an AI-assisted diagnostic tool, and the studies described are non-clinical.

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

Missing Information: This information is not applicable. The device is a wound dressing, not an algorithm.

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

For the non-clinical tests (biocompatibility, sterilization, shelf-life, packaging validation), the "ground truth" would be established by international standards and validated test methods (e.g., ISO Standard 10993-1 for biological evaluation of medical devices). The document explicitly states, "All tests were performed in accordance with US FDA General Program Memorandum #G95-1 Part-10993-1 of the International Standard Organization (ISO) Standard (Biological Evaluation of Medical Devices) by North American Science Associates, Inc. (NAMSA)."

8. The sample size for the training set

Missing Information: This is not applicable as the device is a medical dressing and not an AI/machine learning model that would require a training set.

9. How the ground truth for the training set was established

Missing Information: This is not applicable as the device is a medical dressing and not an AI/machine learning model.

In summary:

The provided document details non-clinical performance criteria and states that the device met these criteria through tests conducted according to international standards (ISO 10993-1). However, it lacks specific quantitative details about the acceptance criteria themselves, sample sizes for the tests, and is not relevant to questions pertaining to AI/ML device evaluations or human expert-led studies.

Ask a specific question about this device