Search Results

Manukapli Wound Dressings are sterile, single-use wound care dressings for use in moist wound management. Manukapli 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, Manukapli 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

Manukapli Wound Dressing consists of a sterile wound dressing designed to promote a moist wound healing environment. The device is constructed using medical grade Manukapli that is harvested and processed under controlled conditions. This Manukapli is sealed into polyethylene tubes before sterilization using gamma irradiation and is intended to be used by medical staff as part of a treatment program for patients with problematic wound care requirements. The device is provided sterile and is designed to be single used only. This is achieved by the tube design having a twist & shear off end cap that cannot be replaced.

The provided text describes a medical device, Manukapli Wound Dressings, and the nonclinical testing performed to demonstrate its biocompatibility. However, it does not include information about acceptance criteria or a study that proves the device meets those criteria in the context of diagnostic accuracy, which is typically what "acceptance criteria" and "device performance" implies for AI/ML devices.

The information primarily focuses on:

• Device Description: What the Manukapli Wound Dressing is.
• Intended Use: The types of wounds it's designed to treat (e.g., minor abrasions, leg ulcers, burns).
• Technology Comparison: Stating substantial equivalence to predicate devices based on function, composition, and intended use.
• Nonclinical Testing (Biocompatibility): Tests performed to ensure the material is safe for contact with the human body.

There is no mention of an AI/ML component, diagnostic capabilities, or any performance metrics like sensitivity, specificity, AUC, or reader studies. Therefore, I cannot construct the requested table or answer the specific questions related to AI/ML device performance and ground truth establishment.

Here's a breakdown of what can be extracted and why other parts cannot be answered based on the provided text:

1. Table of acceptance criteria and the reported device performance

• Acceptance Criteria: The document states, "The Manukapli Wound Dressings met the acceptance criteria for all tests conducted and is considered biocompatible under the conditions tested." However, the specific numerical or qualitative criteria for these biocompatibility tests (e.g., "no cytotoxicity observed," "irritation score < 1.0") are not detailed.
• Reported Device Performance: The reported performance is simply that the device "met the acceptance criteria" for biocompatibility. No detailed performance metrics (like those used for diagnostic AI devices) are provided.

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

• Not Applicable. This device is a wound dressing, not a diagnostic AI/ML device. The "test set" in this context refers to samples used for biocompatibility testing (e.g., cells, animal tissues for irritation tests), not a dataset of patient cases. The document does not specify the sample sizes for these biocompatibility tests, only that they were performed according to ISO 10993-1.

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

• Not Applicable. This question is relevant for diagnostic AI/ML devices where ground truth often relies on expert consensus. The "ground truth" for biocompatibility testing is determined by standardized protocols and laboratory measurements, not human expert interpretation of images or patient data.

4. Adjudication method for the test set

• Not Applicable. Adjudication methods like "2+1" are used in human reader studies for diagnostic accuracy. This is not relevant for biocompatibility testing.

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

• Not Applicable. No MRMC study was mentioned as this is not an AI/ML diagnostic device.

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

• Not Applicable. No algorithm is described.

7. The type of ground truth used

• The "ground truth" for the nonclinical biocompatibility tests would be the established scientific standards and measurements for evaluating material compatibility with biological systems (e.g., cell viability assays, irritation indices from animal models).

8. The sample size for the training set

• Not Applicable. There is no mention of a "training set" for an AI/ML algorithm.

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

• Not Applicable. There is no mention of a "training set" for an AI/ML algorithm.

In summary, the provided document describes a medical device (wound dressing) and its nonclinical biocompatibility testing for regulatory clearance. It does not provide information relevant to the performance evaluation of an AI/ML diagnostic device.

Ask a specific question about this device