510(k) Biocompatibility vs Cleaning Validation

R

restis7

Registered
#1
#1
We submitted our 510k for our nasopharyngoscope and our original submission had biocompatibility testing done by our manufacturing partner's testing facility. They performed irritation and cytotoxicity testing. When they performed these tests, they cleaned the device first with a solution of 70% ethanol and then rinsed in PBS with 1% penicillin/ streptomycin solution.

We have submitted two other scopes in the last 5 years and both times we went through and did our own cleaning validation with Cidex OPA and Enzol which are more commonly used solutions in the US. These solutions are both 510(k) approved and sold by J&J.

One of our scopes that we submitted in 2013 for approval was submitted identically to this one. The 2019 scope is a more advanced video scope as opposed to the eye piece one from 2013. There was the same biocomp lab testing using the same cleaning and we also did a separate cleaning validation in the US using the different enzymatic solutions. We also have the exact same FDA auditor. We didn't use the 2013 scope as predicate because it had a different product code and went with two video scopes instead.

Our deficiency question this time is:
In your biocompatibility testing, the non-sterile test article was disinfected with 70% ethanol and then rinsed in PBS with 1% penicillin/streptomycin solution. However, your proposed reprocessing methods for the subject device use an enzymatic detergent, Cidex® OPA and Steris® S40 Sterilant Concentrate. Please explain why your test article was not prepared using the reprocessing methods proposed in your labeling and provide your rationale for considering your adopted approach is appropriate. Similarly, please clarify why your proposed reprocessing methods do not introduce toxic residues into the device. Otherwise, please repeat all biocompatibility tests on the final finished form of the subject device using worst-case cleaning, high-disinfection and sterilization methods.

Any suggestions on how to respond to this? Of course our proposed reprocessing methods does not introduce toxic residues into the device. The solutions used are approved and widely used and our cleaning validation demonstrated that they were efficient in cleaning our scope.
 
Paper to QMS ad
Elsmar Forum Sponsor
M

Marcelo

Inactive Registered Visitor
#2
#2
You need to do a proper biological evaluation, and any test required to be performed or re-performed would only be the result of your toxicological risk assessment (as per ISO 10993-1 and ISO 14971).
 
Y

yodon

Staff member
Super Moderator
#4
#4
Not surprising they were more critical of the process this time. The whole duodenoscope thing has everyone at heightened awareness of cleaning.

Exposing materials to solutions could have an impact on the biocompatibility assessment so the finding doesn't seem illogical.
 
I

indubioush

Quite Involved in Discussions
#5
#5
I am confused. Did you clean the device with Cidex OPA and then do a biocompatiblity assessment on that device? Or did you only do biocomp on a device cleaned with isoproanol and the antibiotic mixture? Cidex OPA can cause an allergic reaction in its liquid form. Biocomp should always be done using a device or representative device that has undergone the same processing as the commercialized device.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
shimonv Referring to previously submitted biocompatibility results in a new 510(k) submission Other US Medical Device Regulations 1
A Biocompatibility omission justification for FDA 510(k) 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 8
N Can I submit 510(k) without Biocompatibility Test Results? 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 2
M Should 510(k) Predicates be Actively Listed Devices? Other US Medical Device Regulations 0
A Several sections of traditional 510(K) have the same or similar requirement of content. US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 4
A Some questions about voluntary consensus standards in traditional 510(k) submission US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 6
A Some doubts about traditional 510(k) submission US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 5
A Bench test report translation to English for 510(k) submission Other US Medical Device Regulations 2
S Special 510(K) - Labeling change from Rx to OTC Other US Medical Device Regulations 11
J 510(k) for a control kit for an external IVD test kit 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 1
Y Expanding the indications for use for a 510(k) cleared device Medical Device and FDA Regulations and Standards News 5
T First 510(k) submission - Class II software as medical device US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 1
T Submitting MR Compatibility Data for 510(k) Cleared Device Other Medical Device and Orthopedic Related Topics 2
M CE Mark and 510(k) -Global registration requirements for every country Other Medical Device Regulations World-Wide 3
Z 510(k) usage - Company has 2 physically similar products Medical Device and FDA Regulations and Standards News 2
K 510(K) File eCopy Submission 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 16
Q Need clarification on requirements.... Class i, gmp & 510(k) exempt Medical Device and FDA Regulations and Standards News 12
D Redacted 510(k)s - Example wanted Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 14
K Changing the Address in 510(K) Approved Product 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 1
K Completing Design Controls after 510(k) Clearance Other US Medical Device Regulations 11
P Predicate Device Information for 510(k) Submission Medical Device and FDA Regulations and Standards News 4
M 510(k) 10993 Biocompability Testing Other US Medical Device Regulations 15
D First 510(k) Submission - Don't Forget Tips US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 5
K Reporting a Change of Contract Manufacturer for a 510(k) cleared device Other US Medical Device Regulations 5
K Mammography Machine Bench Testing - FDA 510(K) US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 5
D Is Human Factors testing mandatory for a 510(k) submission? Human Factors and Ergonomics in Engineering 16
D Pre-Submission after 510(K) Submission? Other US Medical Device Regulations 4
M Informational US FDA Final Guidance – Special Premarket Notification [510(k)] Pathway Medical Device and FDA Regulations and Standards News 0
M CBE (Change Being Effected) 510(k) Submission Other US Medical Device Regulations 2
K 510(K) Submission (Traditional) for Medical Device US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 15
F Replacement Bone Screws - Traditional 510(k) or Special 510(k)? Other US Medical Device Regulations 7
M Informational US FDA Final guidance – Metal Expandable Biliary Stents – Premarket Notification (510(k)) Submissions Medical Device and FDA Regulations and Standards News 0
Watchcat Informational FDA Proposal to "Modernize" the 510(k) - 2019 Other US Medical Device Regulations 1
B 510(k) clearance claim on medical device product packaging Other US Medical Device Regulations 6
L A Taiwan company want to sell Class I medical device (510(k) exempt) on Amazon, should we register with FDA? US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 4
B Submit a 510(k) with a Predicate cleared but not Listed US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 9
K Change of Existing Medical Devices and 510(k) US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 9
S Where did FDA 510(K) form 3654 go? Other US Medical Device Regulations 1
M Has anyone here assessed the latest Abbreviated 510(K) guidance document? 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 1
M Informational USFDA – Refuse to Accept Policy for 510(k)s Medical Device and FDA Regulations and Standards News 1
K 510(k) expanding the indication for use for a cleared device Other US Medical Device Regulations 6
P 510(k) cleared, Rx only and home use 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 9
lilybef Number of lots required for stability testing of a Class II device in the 510(k) Qualification and Validation (including 21 CFR Part 11) 3
T Executive summary for Traditional 510(k) 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 6
M FDA News US FDA – November 2018 510(k) Clearances Medical Device and FDA Regulations and Standards News 0
M FDA News FDA Report - FDA Has Taken Steps to Strengthen The 510(k) Program Other US Medical Device Regulations 0
M Medical Device News FDA - Transformative new steps to modernize FDA’s 510(k) program to advance the review of the safety and effectiveness of medical devices Other US Medical Device Regulations 0
L 510 (K) Pre-Sub meeting - Does it worth? US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 4
L Traditional 510(K) - Software - Clinical testing? 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 1
K Letter to file vs Special 510 for additional accessory in orthopaedic kit Other US Medical Device Regulations 1
Similar threads
Top Bottom