Search Filters

Search Results

Found 1 results

510(k) Data Aggregation

    K Number
    K101822
    Manufacturer
    Date Cleared
    2010-11-19

    (142 days)

    Product Code
    Regulation Number
    880.6250
    Reference & Predicate Devices
    Predicate For
    AI/MLSaMDIVD (In Vitro Diagnostic)TherapeuticDiagnosticis PCCP AuthorizedThirdpartyExpeditedreview
    Intended Use

    A disposable medical glove to be worn on the hand of the healthcare and similar personnel to prevent contamination between healthcare personnel and patient.

    Device Description

    Non-sterile , Powder-free Blue Nitrile Examination Gloves , Tested for use with Chemotherapy Drugs.

    AI/ML Overview

    The provided documents describe the performance of "Non-sterile, Powder-free Blue Nitrile Examination Gloves, Tested for use with Chemotherapy Drugs" (K101822) against various acceptance criteria relevant to medical examination gloves and specifically for their resistance to chemotherapy drugs.

    Here’s a breakdown of the information requested:

    1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

    The acceptance criteria for the device are largely based on established ASTM (American Society for Testing and Materials) standards and a comparison to a legally marketed predicate device (K082957). The key performance indicator for chemotherapy drug resistance is the "Breakthrough Detection Time" as per ASTM D6978-05.

    Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance for K101822

    Characteristic and ParameterAcceptance CriteriaReported Device PerformanceMeets Criteria?
    General Glove Characteristics
    Device ClassClass I (as per predicate)Class IYes
    Product CodeLZA (as per predicate)LZAYes
    Glove ColorBlue (as per predicate)BlueYes
    DimensionsMeets ASTM D6319-00a-05Meets ASTM D6319-00a-05Yes
    Physical PropertiesMeets ASTM D6319-00a-05Meets ASTM D6319-00a-05Yes
    Freedom From PinholesMeets ASTM D6319-00a-05 (and/or ISO 2859-1, ASTM D5151-06)Meets ASTM D6319-00a-05Yes
    Powder-freeMeets ASTM D6124-06Meets ASTM D6124-06Yes
    Biocompatibility
    Primary Skin IrritationPasses Primary Skin Irritation in Rabbits (as per predicate)Passes Primary Skin Irritation in RabbitsYes
    SensitizationPasses Guinea Pig Maximization (similar to predicate's Guinea Pig Sensitization)Passes Guinea Pig MaximizationYes
    Chemotherapy Drugs Permeation (ASTM D6978-05)
    Cisplatin> 240 minutes (as per predicate)> 240 minutesYes
    Cyclophosphamide (Cytoxan)> 240 minutes (as per predicate)> 240 minutesYes
    Doxorubicin Hydrochloride> 240 minutes (as per predicate)> 240 minutesYes
    Etoposide (Toposar)> 240 minutes (as per predicate)> 240 minutesYes
    Flurouracil> 240 minutes (as per predicate)> 240 minutesYes
    Paclitaxel (Taxol)> 240 minutes (as per predicate)> 240 minutesYes
    Vincristine Sulfate> 240 minutes (as per predicate)> 240 minutesYes
    Dacarbazine (DTIC)> 240 minutes (as per predicate)> 240 minutesYes
    Methotrexate> 240 minutes (as per predicate)> 240 minutesYes
    Carmustine (BCNU)Not specified as a pass/fail threshold, but noted as having extremely low permeation time in the predicate0.49 minutesNo (Note: Not approved for use with this drug)
    ThiotepaNot specified as a pass/fail threshold, but noted as having extremely low permeation time in the predicate2.61 minutesNo (Note: Not approved for use with this drug)
    LabelingMeets FDA requirementMeets FDA requirementYes

    Summary of Study Proving Acceptance:

    The device K101822 was shown to meet its acceptance criteria through various tests described in the "Substantial Equivalence Discussion" (Document 2, page 2 of 2) and the "CONCLUSION" (Document 4, page 1 of 1). The primary study for chemotherapy drug resistance was conducted according to ASTM D6978-05. For other characteristics like dimensions, physical properties, freedom from pinholes, and powder-free status, the device was tested against and found to meet ASTM D6319-00a-05, ISO 2859-1 (for water leak test), ASTM D5151-06 (for detection of holes), and ASTM D6124-06 respectively. Biocompatibility tests included Primary Skin Irritation in Rabbits and Guinea Pig Maximization tests.

    The device's performance was directly compared to a legally marketed predicate device, Siam Sempermed Corp. Ltd.'s Non-sterile, Powder-free Nitrile Examination Glove (K082957), showing substantial equivalence in all tested parameters, except for highlighting the short permeation times for Carmustine (BCNU) and Thiotepa, for which the gloves are explicitly not approved.

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

    • Sample Size for Test Set: The specific sample sizes for each test (e.g., number of gloves tested for chemotherapy permeation, number of rabbits/guinea pigs for biocompatibility, or specific counts for physical properties) are not explicitly stated in the provided documents. The documents only state that the device "Meets ASTM D6319-00a-05," "Meets ASTM D6124-06", etc., which implies that the testing was performed according to the methodologies and sample size requirements specified in those respective ASTM/ISO standards.
    • Data Provenance: The data is presented as part of a 510(k) Premarket Notification submission to the FDA by SGMP Company Limited, located in Thailand (Document 0, page 1 of 2). This indicates the testing was conducted by or on behalf of the manufacturer, and generally, such data would be generated in a controlled laboratory environment. The documents do not specify the country of origin of the specific lab that conducted these tests, but the manufacturer is based in Thailand. The studies were retrospective in the sense that they were conducted to characterize the finished medical device for regulatory submission, rather than as part of a clinical trial.

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

    This question is not applicable to this type of device submission. The "ground truth" for the performance of these examination gloves is established through standardized laboratory tests (e.g., ASTM standards) measuring physical and chemical properties, not through expert human interpretation or clinical ground truth. Therefore, there are no "experts" in the sense of medical professionals establishing ground truth for diagnostic accuracy, nor are their qualifications relevant here.

    4. Adjudication method for the test set

    This question is not applicable. Adjudication methods (like 2+1, 3+1) are typically used in clinical studies or studies involving human judgment (e.g., for image interpretation) to resolve disagreements among experts. The performance of these gloves is determined by objective, quantitative laboratory measurements according to published standards.

    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

    This question is not applicable. An MRMC study is relevant for diagnostic devices (e.g., AI algorithms for image interpretation) where human readers evaluate cases with and without AI assistance. This submission describes an examination glove, which is a physical barrier device, and does not involve human readers or AI assistance.

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

    This question is not applicable. This describes a physical medical device (examination gloves), not an algorithm or AI system.

    7. The type of ground truth used

    The ground truth used for performance validation is based on objective, quantitative measurements obtained through standardized laboratory testing protocols, primarily from ASTM standards (D6319-00a-05, D6124-06, D6978-05) and ISO 2859-1. For biocompatibility, the ground truth is established by the observed biological responses in animal models (rabbits and guinea pigs) according to standardized tests for skin irritation and sensitization. The device's performance is then compared against the requirements specified in these standards and against the performance of a legally marketed predicate device.

    8. The sample size for the training set

    This question is not applicable. This is a physical medical device, not an AI model or algorithm that requires a "training set" of data.

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

    This question is not applicable as there is no training set for this type of device.

    Ask a Question

    Ask a specific question about this device

    Page 1 of 1