Retrospective clinical evaluation of patient outcomes
The sponsor utilized a retrospective clinical evaluation of 32 patients treated with the device in routine neurosurgical procedures to support the clinical substantial equivalence of the device.
Filipi et al. (2001) retrospective evaluation; Retrospective clinical evaluation
32 patients who received Tutoplast bovine pericardium dural grafts; Sample Size: 32
Not applicable for this study
Clinical outcomes, ease of suturing, seal integrity
Indications for Use
The device is indicated as a dura substitute for the repair of dura mater.
Device Story
Device is a sterile, collagenous connective tissue graft derived from bovine pericardium. Processed via proprietary tissue preservation and gamma irradiation to maintain mechanical strength and elasticity of native tissue. Used as a dura substitute in neurosurgery; applied by surgeons to repair dura mater. Provides a scaffold for replacement by endogenous tissue; suturable; forms a watertight seal. Benefits include effective dural closure and integration into host tissue. Supplied as terminally sterilized sheets in various sizes.
Clinical Evidence
Evidence includes bench testing, animal implantation, and clinical literature. Bench tests: cytotoxicity (non-cytotoxic), suture pullout, burst strength, and shrink temperature showed equivalence to predicates. Animal study: demonstrated resorption and integration. Clinical evidence: prospective cohort study (Sabatino et al., 2014) compared autologous galea-pericranium vs. Tutopatch, showing adequate performance with no adverse effects. Retrospective evaluation (Filipi et al., 2000) of 32 patients using Tutoplast bovine pericardium confirmed ease of suturing, watertight seal, and favorable clinical outcomes.
Technological Characteristics
Non-crosslinked bovine pericardium; collagenous connective tissue with three-dimensional intertwined fibers. Terminally sterilized via gamma irradiation. Form factor: sheets of various sizes. Mechanical properties: retains native tissue elasticity and strength. Biocompatible; resorbable scaffold.
Indications for Use
Indicated for patients requiring repair of the dura mater during neurosurgical procedures.
Regulatory Classification
Identification
A dura substitute is a sheet or material that is used to repair the dura mater (the membrane surrounding the brain).
{0}------------------------------------------------
Image /page/0/Picture/0 description: The image shows the logo for RTI Surgical. The logo consists of the letters "rti" in a square with rounded corners, followed by the word "surgical" in a simple, sans-serif font. The letters "rti" are in a bold, blocky font, while the word "surgical" is in a lighter, more open font.
MAR 3 1 2014
K132860
. .
1
# 05 510(k) Summary
Date: March 315, 2014
Submitted By:
Esther Carbon Manager, Global Regulatory Labeling RTI Surgical, Inc. 11621 Research Circle Alachua, FL 32615 Tel: 386-418-8888 Fax: 386-418-1627
## Trade Name:
Bovine Pericardium Suturable Dural Graft, Tutopatch™ DM Graft, Tutoplast® Bovine Pericardium DM
## Classification Name and Code:
Dura substitute (21 CFR 882.5910, product code GXQ)
## Substantial Equivalence:
The proposed device is substantially equivalent to the predicate device Dura-Guard (K950956 and K982282) and Lyoplant (K970851) in intended use, material, design and function. The proposed device is substantially equivalent to the predicate device Dura-Matrix (K061487) in intended use, design and function. The proposed device is similar in design, function, materials and processing to reference devices Tutopatch™ bovine pericardium (K991296, K073097, K081538 and K091142) and similar to intended use, function, design and processing to reference device Tutoplast® Dura Mater (K910555).
## Device Description:
The proposed device is composed of bovine pericardium processed through a proprietary tissue preservation and sterilization process which includes gamma irradiation. The proposed device is composed of collagenous connective tissue with three-dimensional intertwined fibers and can be fixed regardless of the direction of the device. Collagenous connective tissue with multidirectional fibers retains the mechanical strength and elasticity of the native tissue, while providing the basic structure to support replacement by new endogenous tissue. The proposed device in its unopened, undamaged package is sterile.
## Indications for Use:
The device is indicated as a dura substitute for the repair of dura mater.
{1}------------------------------------------------
# Summary of Technological Characteristics
Summary of Tachnological Characteristics:
The device is composed of non-crosslinked bovine pericardium that has ben material, design del production as listed in the blo
belo
| Characteristic | Proposed Device | Predicate Device,<br>Dura-Guard<br>(K950956 and<br>K982282) | Predicate Device,<br>DuraMatrix<br>(K061487) | Predicate Device,<br>Lyoplant<br>(K970851) | Reference Device,<br>Tutopatch<br>(K991296,<br>K081538, K091142) | Reference Device,<br>Tutodent<br>(K073097) | Reference Device,<br>Tutoplast<br>processed human<br>dura<br>mater(K910555) |
|-------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Intended Use | Dura substitute | SAME | SAME | SAME | Surgical mesh | Barrier, Animal<br>Source, Intraoral | SAME |
| Material | Bovine pericardium | SAME | Bovine collagen | Collagen from<br>bovine pericardium | SAME | SAME | Human dura |
| Design | Terminally sterilized<br>sheets in various<br>sizes | Aseptically<br>processed sheets<br>in various sizes | Resorbable,<br>suturable<br>membrane | Absorbable,<br>suturable<br>membrane | SAME | SAME | SAME |
| Function | Dura substitute | SAME | SAME | SAME | Scaffold for soft<br>tissue repair | Scaffold for soft<br>tissue repair | SAME |
| Processing | Proprietary tissue<br>sterilization process | Apex processing | Proprietary<br>processing | Proprietary<br>processing | SAME | SAME | SAME |
| Chemical<br>composition | | | | | | | Not applicable to these devices |
| Energy Source | | | | | | | Not applicable to these devices |
ਟ
{2}------------------------------------------------
## Performance Data Supporting Substantial Equivalence Determination:
The proposed device is equivalent to the predicate devices in intended use, material, design, and function. The biomechanical properties of the proposed and predicate devices were evaluated in a series of in vitro tests and implantation in an animal model. Burst strength, uniaxial strength and suture pullout strength were substantially equivalent for the proposed and predicate devices. The table below summarizes the testing used to determine substantial equivalence of the proposed device.
| Test | Results | Conclusions |
|---------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------|
| Cytotoxicity - Inhibition<br>of Cell Growth Assay | No leachable materials were released in cytotoxic<br>concentrations from the device. The proposed device is<br>non-cytotoxic. | Substantially<br>equivalent |
| Suture Pull out (N) | The proposed device suture pull-out max load is comparable<br>to the DuraMatrix predicate device. | Substantially<br>equivalent |
| Burst Strength (N) | The proposed device burst strength is greater than the<br>DuraMatrix predicate device. | Substantially<br>equivalent |
| Shrink temperature (°C) | The shrink temperature of the proposed device is<br>comparable to the Lyoplant predicate device. | Substantially<br>equivalent |
| Max Load (N) | The maximum load at failure of the proposed device is<br>comparable to the DuraMatrix predicate device. | Substantially<br>equivalent |
Pyrogenicity of the device was evaluated using the Limulus Amoebocyte Lysate (LAL) assay on the final sterilized device. The device did not elicit a response. All device lots will be tested to ensure the endotoxin level is <2.15 EU per device.
The functional properties of the proposed and predicate device were evaluated in a pre-clinical implantation study and the proposed device performed as well as a similar dura substitute. Clinical and gross pathology, cerebrospinal fluid leakage and the local effects of implantation were assessed and results demonstrate the proposed and predicate devices are substantially equivalent. The proposed device was increasingly resorbed. At the end time point the proposed device demonstrated moderate resorption and marked integration.
Clinical evaluation of the proposed device confirms the clinical substantial equivalence to the predicate devices. Sabatino et. al. (2014)1 present the results of a prospective cohort study which compared the clinical outcomes from duraplasty using autologous galea-pericranium and Tutopatch (the proposed device as marketed in the European market). The study evaluated postoperative results (with a minimum follow-up of 12 months), ease of use and procedure costs. The proposed device performed adequately with no evidence of adverse health effects. Filipi et. al. (2000)² present a retrospective evaluation that summarized the outcomes for 32 patients who received Tutoplast bovine pericardium dural grafts (proposed device as marketed in ex-US countries) as part of a variety of neurosurgical procedures. The proposed device was easily sutured with standard suture material and formed a watertight seal. The proposed device provided "excellent material implantation characteristics and favorable clinical outcome" and is recommended as a safe and suitable material for duraplasty. Filipi et. al. concluded, "these results confirm the excellent suitability of Tutoplast bovine pericardium for dural substitution". Results from in vitro, animal studies and clinical evaluation demonstrate that the proposed device is substantially equivalent to the predicate devices for use as a dura substitute.
Sabatino et. al., Autologous dural substitutes: A prospective study, 116, Clin. Neuro and Neurosurgery 20-23 (2014)
<sup>3,</sup> Filipi, R., et al., Bovine pericardium for duraplasty: clinical results in 32 patients. Neurosurg Rev, 2001. 2042-3): g 103-7.
{3}------------------------------------------------
## DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES
Public Health Service
Food and Drug Administration 10903 New Hampshire Avenue Document Control Center - WO66-G609 Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002
## March 31, 2014
RTI Surgical, Inc. Ms. Esther Carbon Manager, Global Regulatory Labeling 11621 Research Cir. Alachua, FL 32615
Re: K132850
Trade/Device Name: Bovine Pericardium Suturable Dural Graft, Tutopatch™ DM Graft, or Tutoplast® Bovine Pericardium DM Regulation Number: 21 CFR 882.5910 Regulation Name: Dura Substitute Regulatory Class: Class II Product Code: GXQ Dated: February 24, 2014 Received: February 26, 2014
Dear Ms. Esther Carbon:
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 addional in the 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 that I Dri has made a acceministered by other Federal agencies. You must comply
{4}------------------------------------------------
with all the Act's requirements, including, but not limited to: registration and listing (21 CFR Part 807); labeling (21 CFR Part 801); medical device reporting (reporting of medical devicerelated 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 Part 801), please contact the Division of Small Manufacturers, International and Consumer Assistance at its tollfree number (800) 638-2041 or (301) 796-7100 or at its Internet address
http://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/Resourcesfor You/Industry/default.htm. Also, please note the regulation entitled, "Misbranding by reference to premarket notification" (21 CFR 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/ReportaProblem/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/ResourcesforYou/Industry/default.htm.
Sincerely yours,
# Joyce M. Whang -S
for Carlos L. Peña, PhD, MS Director Division of Neurological and Physical Medicine Devices Office of Device Evaluation Center for Devices and Radiological Health
Enclosure
{5}------------------------------------------------
## Indications for Use
510(k) Number (if known)
## K132850
Device Name
Bovine Pericardium Suturable Dural Graft Tutoplast® Bovine Pericardium DM Tutopatch™ DM Graft
#### Indications for Use (Describe)
The device is indicated as a dura substitute for the repair of dura mater.
Type of Use (Select one or both, as applicable)
区Prescription Use (Part 21 CFR 801 Subpart D)
O Over-The-Counter Use (21 CFR 801 Subpart C)
## PLEASE DO NOT WRITE BELOW THIS LINE – CONTINUE ON A SEPARATE PAGE IF NEEDED.
## FOR FDA USE ONLY
Concurrence of Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH) (Signature)
# Joyce M. Whang -S
Form Approved: OMB No. 0910-0120 Expiration Date: January 31, 2017 See PRA Statement on last page.
{6}------------------------------------------------
This section applies only to requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.
#### *DO NOT SEND YOUR COMPLETED FORM TO THE PRA STAFF EMAIL ADDRESS BELOW.*
The burden time for this collection of information is estimated to average 79 hours per response, including the time to review instructions, search existing data sources, gather and maintain the data needed and complete and review the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this information collection, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to:
> Department of Health and Human Services Food and Drug Administration Office of Chief Information Officer Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) Staff PRAStaff(@fda.hhs.gov
"An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB number."
Predicate graph will load when search results are available.
Embedding visualization will load when search results are available.
PDF viewer will load when search results are available.
Loading panels...
Select an item from Submissions
Click any panel, subpart, regulation, product code, or device to see details here.
Section Matches
Results will appear here.
Product Code Matches
Results will appear here.
Special Control Matches
Results will appear here.
Loading collections...
Loading
My Alerts
You will receive email notifications based on the filters and frequency you set for each alert.
Sort by:
Create Alert
Search Filters
Agent Token
Create a read-only bearer token for Claude, ChatGPT, or other agents that can call HTTP APIs.
Copy this now. It will not be shown again.
Connected apps
Apps you authorized through browser sign-in. Disconnecting revokes their access immediately.
Learn the FDA Browser
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.