USP Class VI vs. ISO 10993 - What are the differences?

M

MegSinha

#11
Re: USP class VI versus ISO 10993

thread - 1615, already mentioned once in this discussion

With respect to both the threads I had a question and was hoping someone could help me out! :)

We have a USP Class VI canister which is e-beam sterilized, I was wondering if we need to still do bio-compatibility testing on a sterilized product

Thanks a lot in advance!
 
Elsmar Forum Sponsor
M

MIREGMGR

#12
Re: USP class VI versus ISO 10993

Is the canister a medical device, and the product? (As opposed to a pharma packaging system, for instance.)

If yes to the first question, then USP Class VI is not a relevant qualification for it. You might establish biocompatibility via making the device of a Recognized Consensus Standard material using a validated process that does not degrade that material, or by ISO 10993 testing.

Depending on the device's use, the sterilization process might obligate you to do ISO 10993 testing because of the possibility of chemical degradation that could affect biocompatibility.
 
M

MIREGMGR

#13
Re: USP class VI versus ISO 10993

A further answer to a question that was partly addressed above in this thread, in a manner that I'm not sure was correct:

My understanding is that a statement in a 510(k) that a material is USP Class VI in general will not be accepted by FDA as equivalent to evidence establishing that the nominally corresponding ISO 10993 qualification is satisfied, because the testing protocols are not identical and the test lab from which the results originally came, presumably originally certified only to the Class VI outcome.

My understanding is that the FDA ceased accepting Class VI testing as equivalent to the corresponding ISO 10993 testing as of 1987.
 
M

MegSinha

#14
Re: USP class VI versus ISO 10993

It is a medical device, it is used as a collection canister during liposuction procedures, the material that we use is polystyrene and then do radiation sterilization. I understand what you mean by degrading the material. But, in case the vendor of the material says that it does not degrade even with e-beam sterilization can we use that rationale to say we don't need bio-compatibility?

Thanks for your reply! :)
 
M

MIREGMGR

#15
Re: USP class VI versus ISO 10993

the vendor of the material says that it does not degrade even with e-beam sterilization
Is the evidence that they have provided you...say, a detailed theoretical chemical analysis of worst case irradiation effects corroborated by assay analysis, or ISO 10993 testing of worst case irradiated samples...sufficient to convince the FDA?

(By the way, I keep referencing "US FDA" even though this is in an ISO forum-section. USP Class VI has never had legal substance under European rules, as opposed to US rules where it was meaningful until 24 years ago, so my assumption is that the questions pertain to an FDA context. If that's incorrect, I apologize.)
 
M

MegSinha

#16
Re: USP class VI versus ISO 10993

No it's with respect to the FDA, no they haven't provided us any such documents. But they just say this on their site. You think we might still need to do the testing?

Also, when I read ISO 10993 - I cannot really classify the device in the sense that it is used to collect the fat that is used for re-injection in the patient, but it is still a no contact device because the cannula is the one really contacting the body. So, can we slip through and say its a non contacting device and does not need bio compatibility testing?
 
M

MIREGMGR

#17
Re: USP class VI versus ISO 10993

No it's with respect to the FDA, no they haven't provided us any such documents. But they just say this on their site. You think we might still need to do the testing?
Only objective evidence counts. You could call them and ask if they'll provide some FDA-acceptable objective evidence of their statement. Be sure to tell them, though, that you need a signed certification from them as to the provenance of the evidence, and that that signed certification may be reviewe by the FDA.

Also, when I read ISO 10993 - I cannot really classify the device in the sense that it is used to collect the fat that is used for re-injection in the patient, but it is still a no contact device because the cannula is the one really contacting the body. So, can we slip through and say its a non contacting device and does not need bio compatibility testing?
You need to review US FDA guidance G95-1, and in particular Attachment A. It sounds to me as if your device is an external communicating device, blood path, indirect...or maybe tissue path, communicating, but I doubt it if the removed fat contains any blood, which I think would be common.
 
M

MegSinha

#18
Re: USP class VI versus ISO 10993

I do agree with you, but we are trying to get information from the vendor to see what bio compatibility testing have they done. It's kind of hard to convince my boss if I don't have all the information to tell him that we absolutely need to do this. :(

Thanks so much for all your help! :)
 
C

cisko

#19
Re: USP class VI versus ISO 10993

With regard to FDA regulation, the most common materials--particularly metals--are defined per Recognized Consensus Standards.

Thus if a metal material is certified by the maker, or by a distributor if cert traceability exists up to the maker, as being compositionally consistent with an applicable standard, that material is regarded as biocompatible as defined in the applicable Recognized Consensus Standard.
Hi!

Can you show me where did you find this info on FDA regulation ? Which part ? Do you have the url of that ?

Thanks!
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
Steve McQuality Biocompatibility - USP Class VI vs. ISO 10933 ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 7
S Food Grade or USP Class IV Materials for Manufacturing Injectable Products Other Medical Device Regulations World-Wide 5
M USP Class I & II - Raw material supplier liability and responsibility Other US Medical Device Regulations 6
H Medical Device Adhesive with USP class VI, suited for oral 'use' ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 3
R Which devices are required to meet USP Class 6 or other biocompatibility requirements ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 6
I Testing compliant to USP Class VI and ISO10993-1 compliant. Is that possible? Food Safety - ISO 22000, HACCP (21 CFR 120) 10
dhuot1990 USP 41 Hanging Scale - Is it possible to make a hang scale adhere to USP41 Standards? ISO 17025 related Discussions 3
G HPLC Method Equivalence between USP and EP Various Other Specifications, Standards, and related Requirements 1
M How many Pieces to Test - Sterility Testing USP EU Medical Device Regulations 2
N Sterility Testing - USP Chapter 71 and ISO 11737-2 ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 5
T Understanding USP <1112> Water Activity as applicable to Medical Devices Other Medical Device and Orthopedic Related Topics 4
V Deviating from USP Method for Microbiological Assay Qualification and Validation (including 21 CFR Part 11) 2
M Shelf Life of Mineral Oil USP (put on cutting burrs before shipping) Manufacturing and Related Processes 19
AnaMariaVR2 USP Validation Documents - Free Online Access US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 1
C Validity Duration of USP / FDA Certificate? Other ISO and International Standards and European Regulations 5
I ISO 10993-1:2009 Sensitization (Initial Evaluation Test) vs. USP Other Medical Device Related Standards 3
AnaMariaVR2 ISO 9001:2008 + 4Q Model + USP<1058> ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 4
T Total Organic Carbon (TOC) testing - USP requirements US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 4
M Plastic film materials that will meet both USP and SP? 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 4
B USP (United States Pharmacopeia?s) Compliant Packaging Regulations & Process Pharmaceuticals (21 CFR Part 210, 21 CFR Part 211 and related Regulations) 8
S Is Intracutaneous Reactivity Test (ISO 10993) = Intracutaneous Toxicity (USP) ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 2
S Test Method Validation Help - New titration test method, not defined in the USP Qualification and Validation (including 21 CFR Part 11) 2
shimonv Clinical evaluation report for class I device EU Medical Device Regulations 1
D Control Number for Class III and IV devices Canada Medical Device Regulations 0
M Class II type machine , and its compliance with 60601-1 IEC 60601 - Medical Electrical Equipment Safety Standards Series 14
A Clinical assessment sample size - Medical device Class IIb implantable (93/42 directive) EU Medical Device Regulations 2
J Should a Class 1 medical device with an option to measure body weight be considered Class 1m? EU Medical Device Regulations 0
P ISO 14644 Class 8 Cleanroom Air Filter Requirements Other Medical Device Related Standards 4
J Instructions for use for Class I devices under MDR EU Medical Device Regulations 1
D Electrical Medical Devices class I EU Medical Device Regulations 0
K MDR Class 1 Self Certification - Competent Authority or Notified Body? EU Medical Device Regulations 6
K "World Class Product" based QM. I need advice. Quality Management System (QMS) Manuals 14
L Class IIb devices marked EC according to the 93/42/CE - Portugal CE Marking (Conformité Européene) / CB Scheme 3
J Biocompatbility testing on Class 1 device requirements Other US Medical Device Regulations 12
J Reusable surgical Instrument is under class IIa? EU Medical Device Regulations 4
H EU CE marking for Medical Device Class I EU Medical Device Regulations 2
E Any sample of a full software life cycle IEC 62304 report ( any class )? IEC 62304 - Medical Device Software Life Cycle Processes 1
JoCam Certified QMS for MDR - Class I medical device manufacturers EU Medical Device Regulations 4
N Is there a need for clinical test of Class IIa products (for MDR)? EU Medical Device Regulations 2
K CE Marking Class 1 (Non sterile) medical device CE Marking (Conformité Européene) / CB Scheme 3
G Voluntary Class I Device Filing Other US Medical Device Regulations 4
J IEC 60601-1-11 Home Class II With Ballasts IEC 60601 - Medical Electrical Equipment Safety Standards Series 3
A ISO 13485 for Class 1 Medical Device ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 7
N Validating Software before getting approved as Class 2 device US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 5
D Can a diagnostic device be class I? EU Medical Device Regulations 1
A AMSQQP416E Class 2 type 2 AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 0
S IVD risk class II devices for Brazil and MDSAP Other Medical Device Regulations World-Wide 0
P Anyone have an Idea on UAE Medical device registeration- Class B with FDA only Other Medical Device Regulations World-Wide 0
F Mobile app regulations - Class II medical device 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 1
S Medical watch Class II (AP Type CF) with USB connection IEC 60601 - Medical Electrical Equipment Safety Standards Series 7

Similar threads

Top Bottom