Guidance for Industry and CDRH Reviewers
Guidance for the Content of
Premarket Notifications for
Conventional and High
Permeability Hemodialyzers
|
|
Document issued on: August 7, 1998
|
Gastroenterology and Renal Devices Branch
Division of Reproductive, Abdominal, Ear, Nose and Throat
Office of Device Evaluation
U.S. Department Of Health And Human Services
Food and Drug Administration
Center for Devices and Radiological Health
and Radiological Devices
|
Preface
Public Comment
Comments and suggestions may be submitted at any time for Agency consideration
to Carolyn Y. Neuland, Ph.D., Chief, Gastroenterology and Renal Devices
Branch, Office of Device Evaluation, 9200 Corporate Boulevard, HFZ-470,
Rockville, MD 20850. For questions regarding the use or interpretation
of this guidance contact Gema Gonzalez at (240) 276-4151 or
by electronic mail to gema.gonzalez@fda.hhs.gov.
Additional Copies
World Wide Web/CDRH home page: http://www.fda.gov/cdrh/ode/highpermhemo.pdf,
or CDRH Facts on Demand at 1-800-899-0381 or 301-827-0111, specify number
2201 when prompted for the document shelf number.
Guidance for the Industry and CDRH Reviewers on the Content of Premarket
Notifications for Conventional and High Permeability Hemodialyzers
This guidance document represents the FDA's current thinking on the
content of premarket notification submissions for conventional and high
permeability hemodialyzers. It does not create or confer any rights for
or on any person and does not operate to bind FDA or the public. An alternative
approach may be used if such approach satisfies the requirements of the
applicable statute, regulations or both.
This guidance is based on 1) current scientific knowledge, 2) clinical
experience, 3) previous submissions by manufacturers to the Food and Drug
Administration (FDA), 4) the Safe Medical Devices Act of 1990, 5) the FDA
Modernization Act of 1997 and FDA regulations in the Code of Federal Regulations
(CFR). As advances are made in science and medicine, and changes occur
in implementation of Congressional legislation, these review criteria will
be re-evaluated and revised as necessary. Comments and suggestions on this
draft document are welcomed and should be submitted to Carolyn Y. Neuland,
Ph.D., Chief, Gastroenterology and Renal Devices Branch, Office of Device
Evaluation, 9200 Corporate Boulevard, HFZ-470, Rockville, MD, 20850. Comments
should be submitted within 90 days of the date of issue of this document
to receive consideration for the next revision.
This document is an adjunct to the CFR and other FDA Guidance documents
for the preparation and review of 510(k) submissions. It does not supersede
those publications, but provides additional clarification on what is necessary
before the FDA can clear a device for marketing. The submission must provide
evidence that the device is safe, effective and substantially equivalent
to a predicate device legally marketed in the United States.
A conventional hemodialyzer is described in the FDA regulation,
21 CFR 876.5820. Generally, a conventional hemodialyzer is a device that
allows a transfer of water and solutes between the blood and the dialysate
through a semipermeable membrane. The semipermeable membrane of the conventional
hemodialyzer has a sufficiently low permeability to water that an ultrafiltration
controller is not required to prevent excessive loss of water from the
patient's blood. FDA believes that the in vitro ultrafiltration
coefficient (kUF) for a conventional hemodialyzer would be equal
to or less than 12 ml/hour/mm Hg.
A high permeability hemodialyzer is described in the FDA regulation,
21 CFR 876.5860. Generally, a high permeability hemodialyzer is a device
that has a semipermeable membrane that is more permeable to water than
the semipermeable membrane of the conventional hemodialyzer. This highly
permeable, semipermeable membrane may also permit greater loss of higher
molecular weight substances from the blood. The dialysate delivery system
for these high permeability hemodialyzers requires the use of an ultrafiltration
controller to regulate the rate of removal of water from the patient's
blood. FDA believes that the in vitro ultrafiltration coefficient
(kUF) for high permeability hemodialyzers would be greater than
12 ml/hour/mm Hg. The primary reference for the information required in
a premarket notification (510(k)) for a medical device is found in 21 CFR
807.87. Substantial equivalence to a legally marketed device is to be established
with respect to, but not limited to, intended use, design, energy used/delivered,
materials, performance, safety, effectiveness, labeling, and other applicable
characteristics. Additional guidance on the required elements for a premarket
notification submission can be obtained by referring to the "DRAERD
Premarket Notification [510(k)] Screening Checklist" and "DRAERD
Draft Guidance for the Content of Premarket Notifications." A copy
of each of these may be obtained from the Center for Devices and Radiological
Health's Division of Small Manufacturers Assistance (DSMA) at (800) 638-2041
or (301) 443-6597 or at their internet address: http://www.fda.gov/cdrh/dsma/dsmamain.html
Whether a hemodialyzer is intended for single or multiple use, this
information should appear prominently on the device label. If a hemodialyzer
is intended for multiple use, the submission should also include all information
described in the "Guidance for Hemodialyzer
Reuse Labeling (October 6, 1995)" which can be obtained from DSMA
at the telephone number listed above.
To expedite review of your 510(k) submission, please provide the information
described in this document. FDA recommends that your 510(k) submission
include numbered pages, a table of contents and clearly titled sections.
- DEVICE NAME
Provide the name of the device, including:
- Classification name (i.e., conventional hemodialyzer or high permeability
hemodialyzer);
- Common name (i.e., hemodialyzer);
- Trade or proprietary name;
- Intended use.
- MANUFACTURER INFORMATION
Provide the following information about your company:
- Establishment registration number;
- Address of manufacturing site;
- Name, title and telephone and fax number of contact person.
- DEVICE CLASSIFICATION
Provide the CFR classification regulation number for the device and
any components or accessories.
- DEVICE DESCRIPTION
Provide a detailed description of the hemodialyzer. The description
should include a labeled diagram and the specifications (i.e., length,
width, height, diameter, weight, number of hollow fibers/blood layer sheets,
etc.) for each model included in the submission.
- COMPARISON WITH PREDICATE DEVICE
The hemodialyzer should be compared to a legally marketed predicate
device. A legally marketed predicate device is defined as one which was
in commercial distribution prior to May 28, 1976, (the enactment date of
the Medical Devices Amendments), or one which has been cleared for marketing
in the United States under Section 510(k) of the Food, Drug and Cosmetic
Act (the Act). The comparison should include, at a minimum, the following:
- Intended use
- Materials, specifically:
- Potting resin for fibers, where applicable;
- Blood and dialysate port caps;
- End molds , where applicable;
- Headers;
- Jacket/Housing; and
- "O" rings, if applicable.
- Membranes
- For hollow fiber type, provide:
- Chemical composition;
- Inner diameter [ID] (measured average);
- Wall thickness;
- Number of fibers; and
- Effective fiber length.
- For flat plate type, provide:
- Chemical composition;
- Membrane thickness; and
- Number of blood layer sheets.
- Effective membrane surface area
- Configuration (i.e., overall casing length, width, dimension and geometry,
including ports)
- Total blood volume (priming volume)
- Sterilization method as described in Section IX
- Regulatory status of the predicate hemodialyzer (i.e., a pre-amendment
device or a device which has been cleared for marketing through the 510(k)
process [providing the 510(k) number if known])
FDA recommends that all comparisons be provided in a manner that is
clear and comprehensible, such as in tabular form.
- DEVICE MATERIALS AND BIOCOMPATIBILITY
- An exact identification of all materials used to fabricate all components
of the hemodialyzer, including any colorants (inks, dyes, markings, etc.),
plasticizers or additives should be provided. Materials should be separated
according to whether they have direct or indirect body contact and according
to the duration of contact.
- Biocompatibility data, as recommended by Blue Book memorandum, G95-1
"Use of ISO-10993 Biological Evaluation of
Medical Devices Part 1: Evaluation and Testing" should be provided.
Due to the large disparity in surface area between the hollow fiber membrane
and the rest of the device components, the FDA does not recommend
that extractions be performed on the complete, finished device. The large
surface area of the membrane may dilute the extract of another small component
which could be highly toxic, making the results difficult to interpret.
Instead, FDA recommends that manufacturers separate the membrane from the
rest of the device and extract it separately. Two extracts should therefore
be tested - the membrane and the rest of the device components (i.e., casing,
potting material, end caps, etc.). FDA believes that this approach will
provide scientifically meaningful results while minimizing the number of
tests to be performed. Alternatively, manufacturers may perform finished
device testing, provided the extraction conditions (i.e., volume of solvent
used per surface area of product) are more rigorous than those recommended
in ISO-10993.
Hemodialyzers are considered external communicating devices, circulating
blood, prolonged contact (category B). For the purposes of this document,
a membrane material will be considered new if it contains
a membrane, filler yarn or spacer material that is new to this intended
use in the United States or if the membrane fiber has been chemically modified
or altered from previously legally marketed fibers for a similar intended
use. In contrast, for the purposes of this document, predicate
materials are those that have been well characterized chemically and physically
in the published literature, and have a long history of safety in products
with a similar intended use. Materials should be similar in the complete
formulation (including plasticizers, additives and colorants) to be considered
predicate materials. For predicate materials, the FDA will
accept adequate justification for not conducting some or all of the following
suggested tests.
- Cytotoxicity
- Sensitization (Guinea pig maximization with polar and non-polar extracts)
- Irritation or intracutaneous reactivity
- Systemic toxicity (acute)
- Implantation*
- Genotoxicity**
- Hemocompatibility (hemolysis)***
- Chronic toxicity*
- Carcinogenicity****
- Chemical analysis of potential leachables for membrane or other blood
contacting materials
| * |
Patients are exposed the hemodialyzer materials repeatedly over a long
period of time. A long term implantation study with histopathology may
replace implantation and chronic toxicity. |
| ** |
Suggested Genotoxicity test battery should include: |
- Bacterial cell reverse mutation assay employing specific TA tester
strains of S. Typhimurium and WP2 tested strains of E. coli:
(a) TA98 and (b)TA100 and (c)TA1535 and
(d) TA1537 or TA97 or TA97a and
(e) TA102 or WP2uvrA or WP2uvrA(pKM101)
- Mammalian cell in vitro assay
(a) mouse lymphoma cell L5178Y/TK(+/-) mutagenesis assay
with large and small colony analysis or
(b) Chinese hamster ovary cell (CHO) or
(c) CHO cell or lung (V79) cell/hyposanthine-guanine phosphoribosyl transferase
(HGPRT) assay plus the CHO AS52 cell/GPT assay or
(d) CHO or V79/HGPRT plus an in vitro assay for aberrations in CHO
cells (or human peripheral blood lymphocytes)
- In vivo cytogenetics assay in rodents (usually mice) for detection
of:
(a) bone marrow micronuclei, or
(b) peripheral blood erythrocytes, or
(c) bone marrow chromosomal abberations
| *** |
For new materials, thrombus formation and the potential for
complement activation should be evaluated in a clinical study. |
| **** |
Adequate justification for not performing carcinogenicity testing on
new materials should consist of: |
- Information from genotoxicity testing (including the in vivo
assay described above), and
- Information from the chemical analysis of the leachables, described
above, and
- Risk assessment based on the carcinogenic potential of the expected
leachables obtained from referenced literature.
- PERFORMANCE TESTING - BENCH
Bench testing of hemodialyzers is needed to establish substantial equivalence.
The following tests should be performed on a minimum of three (3) hemodialyzers
of each model:
- For conventional (low flux, Class II) hemodialyzers, the ultrafiltration
rate should be measured at transmembrane pressures (TMPs) of 0, 100, 300,
500, and maximum TMP (when different from these TMPs) and the ultrafiltration
coefficient [kUF] (ml/hr/mm Hg) should be calculated. For high
permeability (high flux, Class III) hemodialyzers, kUF data
should be computed by measuring the slope of the ultrafiltration rate versus
TMP at ultrafiltration rates between 600 and 1800 ml/hr using a minimum
of four data points. The kuf data should be measured using either
bovine or expired human blood (specify hematocrit).
- The pressure drop (resistance to flow) across the blood side of the
hemodialyzer membrane should be measured for blood flow rates (Qb)
of 200 ml/min, 300 ml/min, 400 ml/min, 500 ml/min, and maximum rate, when
different from these rates. The pressure drop (resistance to flow) across
the dialysate side of the membrane should be measured for dialysate flow
rates (Qd) of 500 ml/min, 600 ml/min, 700 ml/min, 800 ml/min
and maximum rate, when different from these rates.
- Clearances should be measured for urea, creatinine, and Vitamin B12
or inulin at blood flow rates (Qb) of 200 ml/min, 300 ml/min,
400 ml/min, 500 ml/min, and maximum rate, when different from these rates.
For conventional hemodialyzers, clearance data should be collected at 0
and maximum TMP. For high permeability hemodialyzers, the ultrafiltration
rate should be specified.
- Hemocompatibility (i.e., mechanical hemolysis) data should be provided
for a new/altered hemodialyzer design affecting the blood flow pattern
or for maximum blood flow rates that differ significantly from those recommended
for the predicate devices. The data should demonstrate that this design
does not cause excessive lysis of red blood cells. The testing should utilize
the maximum recommended blood flow rates.
- PERFORMANCE TESTING - CLINICAL
- For hemodialyzers labeled "single use only", clinical data
on a minimum of 12 patients selected by the submitter should be provided
to clarify the relationship between the ultrafiltration data obtained from
the in vitro tests and the expected clinical performance of the
hemodialyzer. The testing should be performed using at least one model
of each family. For the purposes of this document, a family is
considered to be a group of dialyzers for which the chemical composition
and the method of processing of the membrane are identical. In vivo
ultrafiltration coefficients should be provided for hemodialyzers during
the first use. A summary of this data should be provided in the instructions
for use and compared to the ultrafiltration coefficients measured in the
in vitro tests. For hemodialyzers labeled for multiple use, additional
clinical data requirements are described in the "Guidance for Hemodialyzer
Reuse Labeling" which can be obtained from DSMA at the telephone numbers
listed above. The FDA considers clinical studies of hemodialyzers with
predicate materials to be non-significant risk.
Existing clinical data (e.g., studies published in the scientific literature
or data collected from foreign sites), may be submitted instead of the
clinical data described above. However, such data must have been collected
under conditions reflecting current hemodialysis practice in the United
States, especially with regard to blood flow rates and dialysis times.
In general, a minimum blood flow rate of 350 ml/min is needed.
- For both single or multiple use hemodialyzers, if the membrane material
is considered new or the design of the hemodialyzer is significantly
different from the predicate device, more extensive clinical data than
that described in part A above or in the "Guidance for Hemodialyzer
Reuse Labeling", will be needed. The FDA recommends that the data
be collected on a minimum of 12 patients for a minimum of 36 treatments.
In vivo ultrafiltration coefficients (kuf) and extent
of removal of urea, albumin and ß2-microglobulin should
be provided for hemodialyzers during the first use from blood samples taken
pre- and post-dialysis. In addition, the submission should include a summary
of any adverse events and data on complement activation and thrombus formation
(discussed in section VI.B above). If applicable, these data may be collected
in conjunction with the clinical data requirements described in the "Guidance
for Hemodialyzer Reuse Labeling." Since the membrane material is new,
the FDA considers this to be a significant risk study, therefore, clinical
studies in the United States must be conducted under an IDE. The FDA recommends
that manufacturers contact us before submitting a 510(k) or IDE to discuss
these issues if appropriate.
- As in part A, existing clinical data (e.g., studies published in the
scientific literature or data collected from foreign sites), may be submitted
instead of the clinical data described above. However, such data should
be collected under conditions reflecting current hemodialysis practice
in the United States, especially with regard to blood flow rates and dialysis
times. In general, a minimum blood flow rate of 350 ml/min will be needed.
- STERILITY
Guidance on sterility issues is described in ODE Bluebook Memorandum
#K90-1, "Sterility Review Guidance (2/12/90)".
A copy can be obtained from DSMA at the telephone number listed above.
All sterile devices are generally required to meet the sterility assurance
level (SAL) of 10-6. Your submission should include the following
information:
- Sterilization method
- Validation method and SAL
- Description of packaging method
- Radiation dose or the maximum levels of residuals of ethylene oxide,
ethylene chlorohydrin, and ethylene glycol which remain on the finished
sterilized device, whichever is applicable.
- For device labeling that includes pyrogenicity information, provide
a description of the method (Limulus Amebocyte Lysate or Rabbit test) and
the sensitivity of the method.
- EXPIRATION DATE TESTING
- All labels for hemodialyzers should include an expiration date. The
following test results should be provided to substantiate the validity
of the proposed expiration date:
- Performance testing, to include fiber leak integrity, ultrafiltration
coefficients and clearance of small and large molecules; and
- Biocompatibility testing of hemodialyzer extracts, to include:
- All testing described in Part VI.B above, or
- Cytoxicity testing and extraction and chemical analysis of leachables
from the membrane and other blood contacting materials along with a risk
assessment of the potential toxicity of the leachables;
and
- Package Integrity testing (to demonstrate sterility and non-pyrogenicity).
- Data should be collected from samples stored during real-time at conditions
that are 110% of the recommended storage conditions (e.g., temperature,
relative humidity). Accelerated conditions may be used to support a marketing
application, however, real-time testing should be initiated at the time
of submission of the marketing application. The real-time results should
be included in the device master record for subsequent review by FDA field
personnel. In addition, a scientific rationale should be provided to support
the chosen conditions for the accelerated testing.
- PROPOSED LABELING
A device label is defined as any identification on the hemodialyzer
and/or on the package in which it is stored and shipped. Guidance on labeling
issues is described in Bluebook Memo G91-1 "Device
Labeling Guidance (3/8/91)". A copy may be obtained from DSMA
at the telephone number listed above.
Proposed labels, labeling, and advertisements sufficient to describe
the hemodialyzer, its intended use, and the directions for use should be
provided with a specific intended use statement and any warnings, contraindications,
or limitations clearly displayed as described in 21 CFR 807.87(e). This
may be provided in draft form. The label of the device must bear the caution
statement as outlined in 21 CFR 801.109(b)(1): "CAUTION: Federal law
restricts this device to sale by or on the order of a physician."
The device label affixed to the hemodialyzer should include, at a minimum,
the device name, U.S. point of contact, corporation name, address, and
phone number, storage conditions, priming volume, sterility status and
method, sterilization date, effective membrane surface area, lot number,
expiration date and an indication whether the device is for single or multiple
use.
In addition, device labeling for the hemodialyzer should address the
following:
- The intended use statement should include specific indications and
intended patient population.
- Contraindications, Warnings, and Precautions should be included in
the labeling of the device. High permeability hemodialyzers should contain
a Warning that they are to be used only with hemodialysis delivery machines
with ultrafiltration controllers.
- The directions for use should contain at a minimum the following:
- Comprehensive instructions for the preparation of the hemodialyzer,
initiation of dialysis, troubleshooting, and discontinuance of dialysis;
- A summary of the in vitro performance data described in section
VIII above, provided in tabular form;
- A listing of the surface area, priming (blood) volume, maximum TMP,
maximum blood flow and maximum dialysate flow for each model;
- A summary of the clinical data described in Section X above,
- Instructions for reprocessing the hemodialyzer and additional labeling,
as described in the "Guidance for Hemodialyzer Reuse Labeling",
where applicable.
- Any claims made in the labeling for clinical benefit of the hemodialyzer
will need to be supported with the appropriate performance data.
Advertisements or promotional literature for the hemodialyzer should
be provided, if available. Literature or labeling may not imply approval
by FDA in any manner or extend the intended use beyond those cleared in
the 510(k).
- 510(k) SUMMARY OR STATEMENT
The Safe Medical Devices Act of 1990 (SMDA) requires all persons submitting
a premarket notification to include either:
- A summary of the safety and effectiveness information in the premarket
notification, or
- The following statement: I certify that, in my capacity as (provide
title) of (provide name of firm), I will make available all information
included in this premarket notification on safety and effectiveness within
30 days of request by any person if the device described in the premarket
notification submission is determined to be substantially equivalent. The
information I agree to make available will be a duplicate of the premarket
notification submission, including any adverse safety and effectiveness
information, but excluding all patient identifiers, and trade secret and
confidential information, as defined in 21 CFR 20.61.
Safety and effectiveness information refers to information in the premarket
notification submission, including adverse safety and effectiveness information
that is relevant to an assessment of substantial equivalence. The information
could be descriptive information about the new and predicate device(s),
or performance or clinical testing information. The 510(k) statement (part
B above) must be signed and dated.
- CERTIFICATION OF TRUTHFULNESS AND ACCURACY
Your submission must contain the following statement:
I certify in my capacity as (provide title) for (provide manufacturer's
name), I believe, to the best of my knowledge, that all data and information
submitted in this premarket notification are truthful and accurate and
that no material fact has been omitted.
The above statement must be signed and dated by a representative of
the company (not by a regulatory consultant).
- INDICATIONS FOR USE
The indications for use should be provided on a separate sheet and they
should agree exactly with the indications provided in the device labeling.
Uploaded on January 7, 1999

CDRH Home Page | CDRH A-Z Index | Contact CDRH | Accessibility | Disclaimer
FDA Home Page | Search FDA Site | FDA A-Z Index | Contact FDA | HHS Home Page
Center for Devices and Radiological Health / CDRH