K101920 · C.R. Bard, Inc. · FTL · Mar 23, 2011 · General, Plastic Surgery
Device Facts
Record ID
K101920
Device Name
VENTRIO ST HERNIA PATCH
Applicant
C.R. Bard, Inc.
Product Code
FTL · General, Plastic Surgery
Decision Date
Mar 23, 2011
Decision
SESE
Submission Type
Traditional
Regulation
21 CFR 878.3300
Device Class
Class 2
Attributes
Therapeutic
Indications for Use
The proposed device, Ventrio ST Hernia Patch, is a sterile, single use device indicated for use in the reconstruction of soft tissue deficiencies, where weakness exists, in procedures involving soft tissue repair, such as for the repair of hernias. The intended use for the proposed device. Ventrio ST Hernia Patch, is the same as the predicate devices. Ventrio Hernia Patch and Sepramesh IP Mesh.
Device Story
Ventrio ST Hernia Patch is a sterile, single-use, self-expanding, partially absorbable surgical prosthesis for soft tissue/hernia repair. Device consists of two layers stitched with PTFE monofilament: a top layer of knitted polypropylene mesh and a bottom layer of Sepramesh IP Mesh (co-knitted polypropylene and polyglycolic acid fibers). The visceral side features a bioresorbable hydrogel coating (sodium hyaluronate, carboxymethylcellulose, polyethylene glycol) to minimize tissue attachment; coating resorbs in <30 days. Sorbaflex Memory Technology, using an extruded polydioxanone (PDO) monofilament ring, provides stability for insertion and placement; PDO degrades via hydrolysis in 6-8 months. Used by surgeons in clinical settings. The fascial side promotes fibroblastic response and tissue ingrowth. Device facilitates surgical repair of soft tissue deficiencies.
Clinical Evidence
Bench testing and preclinical studies performed. Bench testing evaluated physical properties (weave, pore size, density, thickness, stiffness) and mechanical performance (burst strength, suture pullout, weld tensile strength, dry bond strength). Preclinical pig study evaluated peritoneal attachment, mesh contracture, tissue ingrowth, and inflammatory response. In vivo rat study evaluated degradation of coating, PGA fibers, and PDO monofilament. Biocompatibility testing conducted per ISO 10993. No human clinical trial data presented.
Indicated for reinforcement of soft tissue where weakness exists, including hernia repair. For prescription use only.
Regulatory Classification
Identification
Surgical mesh is a metallic or polymeric screen intended to be implanted to reinforce soft tissue or bone where weakness exists. Examples of surgical mesh are metallic and polymeric mesh for hernia repair, and acetabular and cement restrictor mesh used during orthopedic surgery.
{0}------------------------------------------------
MAR 2 3 2011
# Section 8.0
# 510(k) Summary of Safety and Effectiveness
#### Submitter Information A.
| Submitter's Name: | Davol Inc. |
|-------------------|-------------------------------|
| Address: | Subsidiary of C.R. Bard, Inc. |
| | 100 Crossings Boulevard |
| | Warwick, RI 02886 |
| Telephone: | (401) 825-8589 |
|----------------------|----------------|
| Fax: | (401) 825-8765 |
| Contact Person: | Michelle Godin |
| Date of Preparation: | July 8, 2010 |
#### B. Device Name
Trade Name: Common/Usual Name: Classification Name:
Bard Ventrio ST Hernia Patch Surgical Mesh Surgical Mesh, Polymeric
#### ﺰ Predicate Device Name
Trade name:
Ventrio Hernia Patch (Davol Inc.) K100229, K081777
Trade name:
Sepramesh IP Mesh (Davol Inc.) K040868, K053066, K063739
#### Device Description D.
The proposed device, Ventrio ST Hernia Patch, is a self-expanding bioresorbable coated, partially absorbable, sterile prosthesis, containing 2 distinct layers stitched with PTFE monofilament, forming a positioning pocket. The top layer is knitted polypropylene mesh, 0.004" in monofilament diameter, and the bottom layer is Sepramesh IP Mesh. Sepramesh IP Mesh is co-knitted using polypropylene (PP) and polyglycolic acid (PGA) fibers to result in a two-sided mesh with a PP surface and a PGA surface. The mesh is coated on the PGA surface with a bioresorbable, chemically modified sodium hyaluronate (HA), carboxymethylcellulose (CMC) and polyethylene glycol (PEG) based hydrogel. The fascial side of the mesh allows a prompt fibroblastic response through the interstices of the mesh, allowing for tissue ingrowth into the mesh. The visceral side of the mesh is a
{1}------------------------------------------------
bioresorbable coating, separating the mesh from underlying tissue and organ surfaces to minimize tissue attachment to the mesh. Shortly after placement, the biopolymer coating becomes a hydrated gel that is resorbed from the site in less than 30 days.
The device contains Sorbaflex Memory Technology, which provides memory and stability to the device, facilitating ease of initial insertion, proper placement, and fixation of the device. The Sorbaflex Memory Technology is comprised of an extruded polydioxanone (PDO) monofilament that is contained within a knitted polypropylene mesh tube. The extra large oval size patches contain two separate Sorbaflex PDO monofilaments. The Sorbaflex PDO monofilament fully degrades in vivo by means of hydrolysis. Absorption is essentially complete in 6-8 months.
#### E. Intended Use
The proposed device, Ventrio ST Hernia Patch, is a sterile, single use device indicated for use in the reconstruction of soft tissue deficiencies, where weakness exists, in procedures involving soft tissue repair, such as for the repair of hernias. The intended use for the proposed device. Ventrio ST Hernia Patch, is the same as the predicate devices. Ventrio Hernia Patch and Sepramesh IP Mesh.
### F. Summary of Similarities and Differences in Technological Characteristics, Performance and Intended Use
The proposed device, Ventrio ST Hernia Patch, has the same design as the currently marketed Ventrio Hernia Patch (K100229) with the exception of the posterior polypropylene mesh laver and the single layer of expanded polytetrafluoroethylene (ePTFE). These two layers have been replaced by Sepramesh IP Mesh which is a coknitted polypropylene/PGA mesh with a bioresorbable coating. The anterior polypropylene slit mesh and PDO monofilament ring contained within a knitted tube mesh are the same as the predicate device, Ventrio Hernia Patch, as well as the interlocking stitch using polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) monofilament to sew the patch. The Sepramesh IP Mesh
{2}------------------------------------------------
used in the proposed device is exactly the same as the currently marketed device, Sepramesh IP Mesh.
Laboratory bench testing was performed to verify that the proposed device's performance characteristics are similar to that of the predicate devices.
#### G. Performance Data
Bench testing was performed to assess the effects of the new characteristics of the proposed device, Ventrio ST Hernia Patch. The tests compared the proposed device against the predicate devices, Ventrio Hernia Patch and Sepramesh IP Mesh. In accordance with FDA's "Guidance for the Preparation of a Premarket Notification Application for a Surgical Mesh" (March 2, 1999), the tests included physical characteristics including mesh weave, mesh pore size, device density, device thickness, device stiffness as well as performance evaluations including burst strength, suture pullout strength, PDO ring weld tensile strength, PGA pullout strength, dry bond strength, mass/area measurements, and deployment/hydrogel disruption testing. In addition, two preclinical studies were performed. An overall performance study in pigs was performed to evaluate peritoneal tissue attachment, percent area coverage, mesh contracture, tissue ingrowth, and host inflammatory/fibrotic response. An in vivo degradation study was performed in rats to evaluate the host inflammatory/fibrotic response and absorption characteristics of the bioresorbable coating, PGA fibers, and the PDO monofilament during degradation of the material in vivo. The testing presented in this submission demonstrates that the proposed device, Ventrio ST Hernia Patch, is substantially equivalent to the predicate devices. The results of the testing can be found in Section 16.
Biocompatibility testing in accordance with the ISO 10993 standards was conducted. The results indicate that the device is biocompatible per these standards. Results are summarized in Section 15 and copies of the test reports are in Attachment 3.
{3}------------------------------------------------
The results demonstrate that the proposed device is substantially equivalent to the currently marketed predicate devices and therefore, the proposed device, Ventrio ST Hernia Patch, is safe and effective for its intended use.
{4}------------------------------------------------
Image /page/4/Picture/1 description: The image shows the logo for the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services. The logo consists of a circular border with the text "DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES - USA" arranged around the circumference. Inside the circle is an abstract symbol resembling a stylized eagle or bird in flight, composed of three human profiles facing to the right.
Food and Drug Administration 10903 New Hampshire Avenue Document Control Room W-O66-0609 Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002
C.R. Bard, Inc. % Ms. Michelle Godin, MS, RAC Regulatory Affairs Project Manager 100 Crossings Boulevard Warwick, Rhode Island 02886
MAR 2 3 2011
Re: K101920
Trade/Device Name: Ventrio ST Henria Patch Regulation Number: 21 CFR 878.3300 Regulation Name: Surgical mesh Regulatory Class: II Product Code: FTL Dated: March 11, 2011 Received: March 14, 2011
Dear Ms. Godin:
We have reviewed your Section 510(k) premarket notification of intent to market the device referenced above and have determined the device is substantially equivalent (for the indications for use stated in the enclosure) to legally marketed predicate devices marketed in interstate commerce prior to May 28, 1976, the enactment date of the Medical Device Amendments, or to devices that have been reclassified in accordance with the provisions of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (Act) that do not require approval of a premarket approval application (PMA). You may, therefore, market the device, subject to the general controls provisions of the Act. The general controls provisions of the Act include requirements for annual registration, listing of devices, good manufacturing practice, labeling, and prohibitions against misbranding and adulteration. Please note: CDRH does not evaluate information related to contract liability warranties. We remind you, however, that device labeling must be truthful and not misleading.
If your device is classified (see above) into either class II (Special Controls) or class III (PMA), it may be subject to additional controls. Existing major regulations affecting your device can be found in the Code of Federal Regulations, Title 21, Parts 800 to 898. In addition, FDA may publish further announcements concerning your device in the Federal Register.
Please be advised that FDA's issuance of a substantial equivalence determination does not mean that FDA has made a determination that your device complies with other requirements of the Act or any Federal statutes and regulations administered by other Federal agencies. You must comply with all the Act's requirements, including, but not limited to: registration and listing (21
{5}------------------------------------------------
Page 2 - Ms. Michelle Godin, MS, RAC
CFR Part 807); labeling (21 CFR Part 801); medical device reporting (reporting of medical device-related adverse events) (21 CFR 803); good manufacturing practice requirements as set forth in the quality systems (QS) regulation (21 CFR Part 820); and if applicable, the electronic product radiation control provisions (Sections 531-542 of the Act); 21 CFR 1000-1050.
If you desire specific advice for your device on our labeling regulation (21 CFR Patt 801), please go to http://www.fda.gov/AboutFDA/CentersOffices/CDRH/CDRHOffices/ucm115809.htm for the Center for Devices and Radiological Health's (CDRH's) Office of Compliance. Also, please note the regulation entitled, "Misbranding by reference to premarket notification" (21CFR Part 807.97). For questions regarding the reporting of adverse events under the MDR regulation (21 CFR Part 803), please go to
http://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/Safety/ReportalProblem/default.htm for the CDRH's Office of Surveillance and Biometrics/Division of Postmarket Surveillance.
You may obtain other general information on your responsibilities under the Act from the Division of Small Manufacturers, International and Consumer Assistance at its toll-free number (800) 638-2041 or (301) 796-7100 or at its Internet address http://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/Resourcesfor You/Industry/default.htm:
Sincerely yours,
Mark N. Melkerson
Director
Division of Surgical, Orthopedic and Restorative Devices Office of Device Evaluation Center for Devices and Radiological Health
Enclosure
{6}------------------------------------------------
# Indications for Use
### 510(k) Number (if known):
Device Name: Ventrio ST Hernia Patch
### Indications for Use:
The Ventrio ST Hernia Patch is indicated for use in the reinforcement of soft tissue, where weakness exists, in procedures involving soft tissue repair, including repair of hernias.
Prescription Use X (Part 21 CFR 801 Subpart D) AND/OR
Over-The-Counter Use (21 CFR 801 Subpart C)
(PLEASE DO NOT WRITE BELOW THIS LINE-CONTINUE ON ANOTHER PAGE IF NEEDED)
Concurrence of CDRH, Office of Device Evaluation (ODE)
Daniel Krone for MXM
(Division Sign-Off)
(Division Sign-Off) Division of Surgical, Orthopedic, and Restorative Devices
510(k) Number K101920
Two short videos show you everything — or skip straight to the written tutorial if you'd rather read. You can reopen this any time from the Tutorial button in the top bar.
Part 1 — Search, results, and everyday workflows 16 min
Part 2 — Embeddings: the galaxy map 3 min
1. Search: exact and fuzzy
Type a phrase like "coronary artery calcification" into the search box. You get two kinds of results. Exact results match the literal phrase — prefix searches work ("coronary artery calcificati") but suffix searches do not. Fuzzy results match on the meaning and intent of your phrase rather than the exact words, and are sorted by relevance score. Hover over the Exact or Fuzzy badge on any row to see exactly why it matched.
Use the checkboxes above the results to narrow: SaMD keeps only software-only devices, AI / ML keeps only devices with AI.
Exact vs. fuzzy search: what's the difference?
Exact matches on the literal phrase (prefix search works, suffix does not). Fuzzy matches on the meaning and intent of the phrase rather than the exact words. Hover over the badge on any row to see why it matched.
You search "coronary artery calcification" and want only software devices with AI. What two filters do you apply?
Narrow by SaMD (software-only devices), then narrow by AI/ML (devices with AI).
2. The results table
Scroll right in the results table. The intended use is extracted for you — no need to open the PDF. The device story gives a high-level snapshot of what the device does and how it's used. The AI Performance sub-table shows each output name, acceptance criteria, observed values, and development/test dataset descriptions — the same format Innolitics uses for regulatory strategy outputs, and the fastest high-level fingerprint of an AI device. It is AI-generated but has been very reliable in practice.
Where do you find a device's intended use without opening the PDF?
Scroll right in the search results table. The intended use column is extracted for you; no need to dig into the 510(k) summary PDF.
What does the AI Performance sub-table show, and why is it useful?
Output name, acceptance criteria, observed values, development dataset description, and test dataset description. It's the same format we use for regulatory strategy output and Fast 510(k) input, and the fastest high-level fingerprint of an AI device. AI-generated but reliable in practice.
3. Judging fuzzy relevance
Fuzzy results trail off in relevance as you scroll. Use three signals to decide how far down to go: the fuzzy badge explanations, the intended use column, and whether your target output (e.g., Cobb angle) still appears in the AI Performance sub-table. Once it stops appearing, you're past the relevant zone. A top hit with a low score (~0.4) and a stretched explanation is a hint the closest predicates are far away — the project may be headed for De Novo. Note the fuzzy search is a pattern match: it doesn't handle negation ("not") well, and hardware devices can appear — filter by SaMD/AI ML to cut them.
How do you judge how far down fuzzy search results to go?
Use the relevancy signals: the fuzzy badge explanations, the intended use column, and whether the target output (e.g., Cobb angle) still appears in the AI Performance sub-table. Once it stops appearing, results are trailing off in relevancy.
4. Device detail page: chat and citations
Click a device name to open its detail page: device facts on the left, a chat window on the right. Ask something like "Describe the training data". The answer carries little citation bubbles — click one to jump to the highlighted passage in the source PDF, so you can verify every AI answer against the document. There's also a Download PDF button for sharing.
How do you verify an AI chat answer on the device detail page?
Click the citation bubbles to jump to the relevant highlight in the source document.
Reading rule for every project: how many summaries do you read in full?
At least the three most relevant 510(k) or De Novo summaries, in full. After that, use targeted chat questions to confirm your memory quickly. The tool supports this professional habit — it doesn't replace it.
5. Side-by-side comparison
Select multiple rows in the results table (aim for under ~10), then open the PDF Viewer tab. Ask one question — it goes to all selected devices in parallel, each with citations. This is the fastest way to compare and contrast devices: training data, PCCP scope, how they handled adding new scanners, and so on.
What does the side-by-side PDF viewer mode do?
Select multiple devices, open the PDF viewer tab, and ask one question (e.g., "Describe the training data"). It queries all selected devices simultaneously with citations, so you can compare and contrast quickly.
6. Collections
With rows selected, go to the Collections tab and create a labeled collection (e.g., "Cobb Angle Project"). Reload that selection any time — before a client call, pull up the collection and ask questions across all of its devices at once.
How do you save a set of selected devices for later use?
Select the rows, go to the Collections tab, and create a labeled collection (e.g., "Cobb Angle Project"). You can reload the selection anytime and carry it into the PDF viewer and other tabs that support selections.
7. Product codes and the regulations tree
Click a product code in the results to jump to it in the regulations tree — identification text, sibling product codes, and devices you can open in a PDF viewer on the right. Click a regulation number to see its identification, special controls, and related product codes. You can also search by product code or regulation number at the top of the tree. Always read the special controls if any exist for your device — it broadens your search and sharpens pre-kickoff research.
What can you do from the regulations tree view?
Browse product codes and regulation numbers, read the identification text and special controls, browse sibling product codes, open device PDFs on the right, and search by product code or regulation number at the top of the tree.
8. Chart view
Click Show Chart and segment by regulation number (or product code) to see which regulations dominate your result set. Clicking a regulation takes you into the regulations tree. Great for spotting that most matches are, say, hardware laparoscopic devices — a cue to go back and filter.
How do you see which regulations dominate a search result set?
Click "Show Chart" and segment by Regulation Number. Clicking a regulation takes you to the regulations tree.
9. The predicate graph
Open the Predicates tab for a family-tree view of predicate relationships. Click a node to trace its parents and children; selections from search carry over pre-selected. Commonly predicated devices are worth reading — a lot of people predicated them for a reason. The visual lineage is also handy on client calls, e.g. to show how a predicate family evolved and justify why your predicate still holds.
In the predicate graph, why are commonly predicated devices worth reading?
A lot of people predicated them for a reason. Clicking a node traces parents and children, and selections from search carry over pre-selected.
10. Embeddings: the galaxy map
The Embeddings tab plots every matching document in a 2-D "galaxy map" where semantically similar devices cluster together. Hover or click clusters to explore, and let AI label the clusters for you. Embeddings beat product codes for grouping: two devices can carry different product codes (LLZ vs. QIH) yet do the same thing — the embedding captures the meaning of the intended use and device story. This is also exactly how retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) works under the hood, and it makes a great visual on client calls.
Try it yourself
Head to the search page and work through a few of these AI/ML fuzzy searches to build intuition: perivascular fat on CT · aortic valve calcification opportunistic screening on noncontrast CT · breast cancer prediction on digital pathology slides · autism detection · gestational age prediction · a hearing aid that can also detect a pulse · foundation model based analysis of ECG · large language models · penetration test. Watch how the relevance scores, intended use, and AI Performance tables tell you when results stop being meaningful.