Package integrity Testing failure

Balachander

Starting to get Involved
#1
Hi,

Package integrity testing - Dye Penetration method for a medical device failed for real time aging tests. 3 out of 59 was a failure but the accelerated 1 year age testing (last year) did not have any issues.

1. My question is if based on the fact that accelerating aging tests for 1 year shelf life were passed a year ago. Can we perform Sterility test for these products (different batch) to check if the sterile barrier of the cartridge was or wasn’t broken , despite the fact of dye penetration failures in three pouches ?? Our investigation suggested we need to change the package design. We are doing this in order to launch the product on time and in parallel to implement design changes (include all required tests that should be completed).

2. My second question is if we redesign the package, this would affect the current sterilization validation right and it requires re-validation. Please let me know

Thanks,
Bala
 
Elsmar Forum Sponsor

Ronen E

Problem Solver
Moderator
#2
Dye Penetration method for a medical device failed for real time aging tests. 3 out of 59 was a failure
What published standard are you applying? What is your statistical analysis method and pass/fail criterion? What is the statistical significance of this result?
the accelerated 1 year age testing (last year) did not have any issues.
Accelerated ageing is many times inappropriate. Assuming that you are using the simplified Q10 model, please note that it only applies to chemical reactions of order 0 or 1. I highly doubt that the deterioration of your barrier falls within this category (if it's even a deterioration - what were the results at 0, 3, 6 and 9 months?).
Can we perform Sterility test for these products (different batch) to check if the sterile barrier of the cartridge was or wasn’t broken , despite the fact of dye penetration failures in three pouches ??
You can, but (a) I highly doubt sterility could be maintained if the dye penetrated; (b) you'll need do test a batch that was packaged at the same time as the one that failed the dye test, and real-time aged under the same conditions; and (c) you'll have to apply very high statistical rigor (e.g. a big sample size) if you want to use a positive sterility outcome to overrule the negative dye penetration result - as a minimum.
if we redesign the package, this would affect the current sterilization validation right and it requires re-validation.
Correct.
 

Tidge

Trusted Information Resource
#3
These strike me as the most important ("red-face") questions:
What published standard are you applying? What is your statistical analysis method and pass/fail criterion? What is the statistical significance of this result?
Even if 3 failures out of 59 samples was acceptable (in what I assume to be an attribute type test) for sterility (which I would assume to be implicated in rather high severity risks) strike me as being relatively low confidence with marginal tolerance (well below 90%). As far as risk profile for the device goes, we might as well not bother sealing the pouches since it wouldn't be appropriate to claim much of a reduction in risk (based on these results).
 

Balachander

Starting to get Involved
#4
What published standard are you applying? What is your statistical analysis method and pass/fail criterion? What is the statistical significance of this result?

Accelerated ageing is many times inappropriate. Assuming that you are using the simplified Q10 model, please note that it only applies to chemical reactions of order 0 or 1. I highly doubt that the deterioration of your barrier falls within this category (if it's even a deterioration - what were the results at 0, 3, 6 and 9 months?).

You can, but (a) I highly doubt sterility could be maintained if the dye penetrated; (b) you'll need do test a batch that was packaged at the same time as the one that failed the dye test, and real-time aged under the same conditions; and (c) you'll have to apply very high statistical rigor (e.g. a big sample size) if you want to use a positive sterility outcome to overrule the negative dye penetration result - as a minimum.

Correct.
Thank you Ronen for your recommendations.

two more questions:
1. We might not have products from the same batch that failed the dye test. Do you think using a different batch and testing it would be justifiable ?
2. With respect to sterilization revalidation: We would have to repeat the bioburden validation and find the new Correction factor right ?

Thanks in Advance
 

Ronen E

Problem Solver
Moderator
#5
1. We might not have products from the same batch that failed the dye test. Do you think using a different batch and testing it would be justifiable ?
I didn't say it would have to be from the same batch. I said it would need to be (as a minimum, IMO) a batch packaged at the same time as the one that failed the dye test, and real-time aged under the same conditions.
2. With respect to sterilization revalidation: We would have to repeat the bioburden validation and find the new Correction factor right ?
Bioburden is more a function of the device manufacturing process than of the sterile packaging design. Do you intend to change the device design or its manufacturing process (other than the sterile packaging)? Anyway, you will need to follow the process in the standard.
 

Balachander

Starting to get Involved
#6
I didn't say it would have to be from the same batch. I said it would need to be (as a minimum, IMO) a batch packaged at the same time as the one that failed the dye test, and real-time aged under the same conditions.

Bioburden is more a function of the device manufacturing process than of the sterile packaging design. Do you intend to change the device design or its manufacturing process (other than the sterile packaging)? Anyway, you will need to follow the process in the standard.
We don’t have a batch packaged at the same time. This is a batch with a different timeline. Is this fine ??

Regarding the bioburden question- We intend to change the package design. Does this warrant to do re-validation wrt bioburden correction factor ?
Thanks,
Bala
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
N Foil Package Integrity Testing ISO 4074 Other Medical Device Related Standards 1
H Package Integrity Testing Acceptance Criteria ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 3
M Package Integrity Test ASTM F 2096 or ASTM 1929 Quality Assurance and Compliance Software Tools and Solutions 2
M How to validate a Dye Test method used to evaluate Package Integrity Pharmaceuticals (21 CFR Part 210, 21 CFR Part 211 and related Regulations) 8
H Surgical Sealant Package Integrity Test for Glass Vial Filled Product Other Medical Device Related Standards 3
B Client lost copy of previous 513(g) submission package and responses US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 1
K UDI for two units with different S/N on the same package/case Other US Medical Device Regulations 10
M Methods used to label the package EU Medical Device Regulations 4
R Using R package to implement Bayesian phase I/II dose-finding design for three outcomes ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 6
A How much does a complete biocompatibility test package cost? Other ISO and International Standards and European Regulations 1
DuncanGibbons Technical Data Package vs Digital Product Definition APQP and PPAP 0
M API 4F/7K/8C Design Package Validation Oil and Gas Industry Standards and Regulations 2
P Does anyone have a API Q1 Documentation Package? Quality Management System (QMS) Manuals 1
N Post Market Surveillance Package Example Wanted ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 1
H Re-labelling in IVDD - Re-label two products and package them as one CE Marking (Conformité Européene) / CB Scheme 5
M UDI-PI on a package that contains more devices EU Medical Device Regulations 3
M Identical Sales Package in Different Countries Pharmaceuticals (21 CFR Part 210, 21 CFR Part 211 and related Regulations) 0
F Adding a medical device in another medical device package EU Medical Device Regulations 2
M Medical device package insert in EU and USA Japan Medical Device Regulations 2
M Switching (Migrating) to a new QMS Software Package Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 14
J Referencing Medical Device in FDA records - Package contains several other components Other Medical Device Regulations World-Wide 1
S Package performance testing for non-sterile Hydrogels US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 1
ernieto IVD Vials - If we CE Mark a kit's package, do we also have to CE Mark the vials? CE Marking (Conformité Européene) / CB Scheme 4
S "Update" the PPAP Package after Mass Production Commences APQP and PPAP 2
shimonv Packaging Validation for Non-Sterile Package EU Medical Device Regulations 7
Pmarszal GUDID Packaging - Two part package Other US Medical Device Regulations 5
A API (American Petroleum Institute) Design Package Content Requirements Oil and Gas Industry Standards and Regulations 1
P ASTM-F2096 Medical Package Testing Various Other Specifications, Standards, and related Requirements 1
S Package Storage Direction in an I.T. Warehouse ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 2
A JEDEC Std to use as reference for a package of size of 29x29mm with 0.8mm ball pitch Design and Development of Products and Processes 6
R How to go about package validation on a class II, non-sterile device US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 4
B In-Process Sampling Plan for a Secondary Package Adjustment Process Inspection, Prints (Drawings), Testing, Sampling and Related Topics 1
D Incentive Package for obtaining ISO 14001 Certification ISO 14001:2015 Specific Discussions 6
S AS9100C Complete Internal Audit Software Package Recommendations Quality Assurance and Compliance Software Tools and Solutions 14
R What is PSW - Statistical Process Package + Level 5 APQP and PPAP 7
J MOT (Traveler/Router) Software Package Help Quality Assurance and Compliance Software Tools and Solutions 3
K Can anyone recommend a PPAP software package? Quality Assurance and Compliance Software Tools and Solutions 11
C Lean Sigma Manufacturing Handoff Package Contents FMEA and Control Plans 8
Q Faking Data - Refusing to sign Falsified PPAP Submission package Nonconformance and Corrective Action 27
M "Streamlining Package Seal Validation" - I'm looking for this article reference Book, Video, Blog and Web Site Reviews and Recommendations 2
D Packaging Addition - Non-sterile barrier to protect the whole package 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 12
V Issue: Suppliers charge for complete Level III PPAP package - Heat Treated Parts APQP and PPAP 16
J Cpk & Ppk - Reviewing a PPAP Package - Some questions Statistical Analysis Tools, Techniques and SPC 8
G Various ?QMS? packages on the market - Which software package? Quality Assurance and Compliance Software Tools and Solutions 35
M MRP/QMS Software Package to replace our current Paper QMS - Help Quality Assurance and Compliance Software Tools and Solutions 4
J What is a Standard Level IV QA Package General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 1
F Sterile Barrier Package (Tyvek Pouch) Validation Question ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 7
J Testing to ISO 8573 (Compressed Air Package) Classification 4, Paragraph 6.1 Other ISO and International Standards and European Regulations 8
S Does Package Validation required for Service Parts Packaging Carton Box? ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 1
T Electronic Package inserts EU Medical Device Regulations 6

Similar threads

Top Bottom