Search Results

To be used as a temporary dressing in the external auditory canal following tympanoplasty or stapedectomy procedures.

The OTOSILK™ Graft Dressing is a sterile, disposable graft dressing constructed of non-adherent material, designed for use with split thickness skin grafts used in procedures such as tympanoplasty, canalplasty, mastoid tympanoplasty, correction of congenital aural atresia, and removal of canal exostoses.

Split thickness skin grafts may be taken from several sites, using either a razor blade or dermatome. The OTOSILK dressing will be used as a carrier for this skin graft to the ear canal. The graft is placed dermis side up on the dressing and the uncovered material is trimmed away. The skin graft and dressing are then applied to the canal. The dressing is removed from the canal one to two weeks post-operatively. The blue color of the OTOSILK Graft Dressing increases visualization of the dressing, ensuring total removal from the ear canal without disturbing the graft.

This document, a 510(k) summary for the OTOSILK™ Otological Graft Dressing, does not contain the information requested regarding acceptance criteria and a study proving the device meets those criteria.

The provided text focuses on:

• Product Description: What the device is and how it's used.
• Indication For Use: The medical conditions it's intended for.
• Predicate Device: A comparison to an existing, legally marketed device.
• Limited Testing Information: A brief statement that "Sterile finished device samples passed biocompatibility testing and were determined to be non-reactive and non-cytotoxic."

There is no discussion of:

1. Acceptance criteria: No specific performance metrics (e.g., success rates, complication rates, visualization scores) are defined.
2. Reported device performance: No data on the device's actual performance in a clinical or simulated setting is presented, other than the biocompatibility statement.
3. Study details:
   • Sample size for test set or training set.
   • Data provenance (country of origin, retrospective/prospective).
   • Number and qualifications of experts.
   • Adjudication method.
   • Multi-reader multi-case (MRMC) comparative effectiveness study.
   • Standalone algorithm performance.
   • Type of ground truth used or how it was established.

This document appears to be a regulatory submission summary, which typically provides high-level information and often refers to detailed reports that are not included here. To answer your questions, one would need access to the full test reports and clinical study data that would have been submitted alongside this summary.

Ask a specific question about this device