K162934 · Cook Biotech Incorporated · FTM · Jul 10, 2017 · General, Plastic Surgery
Device Facts
Record ID
K162934
Device Name
Biodesign Parastomal Hernia Repair Graft
Applicant
Cook Biotech Incorporated
Product Code
FTM · General, Plastic Surgery
Decision Date
Jul 10, 2017
Decision
SESE
Submission Type
Traditional
Regulation
21 CFR 878.3300
Device Class
Class 2
Attributes
Therapeutic, Real-World Evidence
Real-World Evidence
Submission
Device
Sponsor
RWD Sources
RWE Use Summary
Key Tags
K162934 · Jul 10, 2017
Biodesign Parastomal Hernia Repair Graft
Cook Biotech Incorporated
Peer-reviewed clinical literature (Ellis, 2010); Unpublished long-term clinical follow-up data
The sponsor utilized a published clinical study and unpublished follow-up data on a cohort of patients treated with SIS-based devices to demonstrate the safety and performance of the subject device in parastomal hernia repair.
The Biodesign Parastomal Hernia Repair Graft is intended for use as a soft tissue patch where weakness exists and for the surgical repair of damaged or ruptured soft tissue membranes. It is specifically indicated for the repair of abdominal wall defects and hernias, including but not limited to parastomal hernias.
Device Story
Biodesign Parastomal Hernia Repair Graft is a porcine-derived, bioabsorbable, extracellular collagen matrix (ECM) scaffold; composed of non-crosslinked small intestinal submucosa (SIS) and biodegradable polyglycolic acid (PGA) sutures. Device is perforated to assist fluid transfer; supplied sterile in dried state. Used by surgeons in clinical settings for mechanical reinforcement of soft tissue during hernia repair; scaffold is designed to be remodeled and replaced by host tissue over time. Provides structural support for abdominal wall defects; intended to reduce long-term foreign body presence compared to synthetic meshes. Benefits include biological integration and tissue remodeling.
Clinical Evidence
Clinical evidence provided via peer-reviewed literature (Ellis, 2010). Study of 20 patients with parastomal hernias treated with SIS-based devices; median follow-up 18 months (range 6-38). Initial recurrence rate 10% (2/20). Long-term follow-up (median 53 months) on 19/20 patients showed total recurrence rate of 25% (5/20), with most recurrences asymptomatic or successfully managed with secondary SIS repair. No device-related complications reported after initial seroma management.
Technological Characteristics
Material: Porcine small intestinal submucosa (SIS) and polyglycolic acid (PGA) sutures. Non-crosslinked extracellular matrix. Dimensions: 5x8 cm to 30x30 cm. Thickness: 0.1-1.5 mm. Sterilization: Ethylene oxide. Single-use. Mechanical properties evaluated per FDA surgical mesh guidance (burst strength, tensile strength, suture retention, tear strength, delamination).
Indications for Use
Indicated for patients requiring surgical repair of abdominal wall defects and hernias, including parastomal hernias, where soft tissue reinforcement is needed.
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}------------------------------------------------
Image /page/0/Picture/1 description: The image shows the logo for the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services. The logo features the department's name in a circular arrangement around the perimeter. In the center is a stylized emblem consisting of a caduceus-like symbol with three human profiles facing right, suggesting health and human services.
Food and Drug Administration 10903 New Hampshire Avenue Document Control Center - WO66-G609 Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002
July 10, 2017
Cook Biotech Incorporated Ms. Daniela Changkuon Regulatory Affairs Specialist 1425 Innovation Place West Lafayette, Indiana 47906
Re: K162934
Trade/Device Name: Biodesign Parastomal Hernia Repair Graft Regulation Number: 21 CFR 878.3300 Regulation Name: Surgical Mesh Regulatory Class: Class II Product Code: FTM, OXK Dated: June 7, 2017 Received: June 12, 2017
Dear Ms. Changkuon:
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 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.
{1}------------------------------------------------
If you desire specific advice for your device on our labeling regulation (21 CFR Part 801), please contact the Division of Industry and Consumer Education 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. 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 Industry and Consumer Education 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,
Image /page/1/Picture/7 description: The image shows the text "David Krause -S" in a simple, sans-serif font. The text is arranged horizontally, with "David Krause" appearing first, followed by a hyphen and the letter "S". The text is black against a white background.
for Binita S. Ashar, M.D., M.B.A., F.A.C.S. Director Division of Surgical Devices Office of Device Evaluation Center for Devices and Radiological Health
Enclosure
{2}------------------------------------------------
## Indications for Use
510(k) Number (if known) K162934
Device Name
Biodesign Parastomal Hernia Repair Graft
#### Indications for Use (Describe)
The Biodesign Parastomal Hernia Repair Graft is intended for use as a soft tissue patch where weakness exists and for the surgical repair of damaged or ruptured soft tissue membranes. It is specifically indicated for the repair of abdominal wall defects and hernias, including but not limited to parastomal hernias.
Type of Use (Select one or both, as applicable)
| <div> <span> <span style="font-size:16px;">☑</span> Prescription Use (Part 21 CFR 801 Subpart D) </span> </div> |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| <div> <span> <span style="font-size:16px;">☐</span> Over-The-Counter Use (21 CFR 801 Subpart C) </span> </div> |
### CONTINUE ON A SEPARATE PAGE IF NEEDED.
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."
{3}------------------------------------------------
# 510(k) Summary
#### I. SUBMITTER
Cook Biotech Incorporated 1425 Innovation Place West Lafayette, IN 47906
Phone: (765) 497-3355
Contact Person: Perry W. Guinn Date Prepared: 05 June 2017
#### DEVICE II.
| Name of Device: | Biodesign® Parastomal Hernia Repair Graft |
|-----------------------|-------------------------------------------|
| Common or Usual Name: | Surgical graft |
| Classification Name: | Mesh, Surgical (21 CFR §878.3300) |
| Regulatory Class: | II |
| Product Code: | FTM, OXK |
## III. PREDICATE DEVICE
Permacol® Surgical Implant (K043366; Medtronic)
Reference Device: SIS Hernia Graft (K133306, Cook Biotech Incorporated)
## IV. DEVICE DESCRIPTION
The Biodesign® Parastomal Hernia Repair Graft is identical to the SIS Hernia Graft (i.e. same raw materials, manufacturing processes, configuration, packaging and sterilization). The devices are composed of multiple layers of porcine Small Intestinal Submucosa (SIS), a bioabsorbable, extracellular collagen matrix (ECM) that is non-crosslinked and decellularized; additionally, the device is held together with biodegradable suture to improve device handling characteristics at time of implant and is perforated to assist with fluid transfer. The single-use devices are packaged in a dried state and supplied sterile (EtO) in a sealed double pouch system.
{4}------------------------------------------------
#### V. INDICATIONS FOR USE
The Biodesign® Parastomal Hernia Repair Graft is intended for use as a soft tissue patch to reinforce soft tissue where weakness exists and for the surgical repair of damaged or ruptured soft tissue membranes. It is specifically indicated for the repair of abdominal wall defects and hernias, including but not limited to parastomal hernias.
#### COMPARISON OF TECHNOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS WITH THE VI. PREDICATE DEVICE
The Biodesign® Parastomal Hernia Repair Graft is substantially equivalent its predicate in that they are both specifically indicated for the repair of abdominal wall defects and hernias, including but not limited to parastomal hernias. The technological principle for both the subject and predicate devices is mechanical reinforcement of soft tissue without leaving behind long-term foreign materials. The two devices are biological scaffolds derived from porcine tissue that are processed and designed to meet the requirements of the intended clinical use. Both devices undergo a remodeling process whereby the scaffold is eventually completely replaced by host tissue.
The predicate device is composed of porcine dermis (predominantly collagen and elastin fibers) which is cross-linked by hexamethylene diisocyanate (HMDI). The subject device is composed of non-crosslinked porcine SIS and biodegradable suture; the Biodesign® Parastomal Hernia Repair Graft is identical in all aspects to the SIS Hernia Graft (K133306; reference device). Table 5-1 below provides a comparison of the subject, predicate and reference devices.
| Device | Biodesign® Parastomal Hernia Repair Graft | Permacol® Surgical Implant | SIS Hernia Repair Graft (reference device) |
|----------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Manufacturer | Cook Biotech Inc. | Medtronic | Cook Biotech Inc. |
| 510 (k) Number | K162934 | K043366 | K133306 |
| Intended Use | Intended for use as a soft tissue patch to reinforce soft tissue where weakness exists and for the surgical repair of damaged or ruptured soft tissue membranes. It is specifically indicated for the repair of abdominal wall defects and hernias, including but not limited to parastomal hernias. | Intended for use as a soft tissue patch to reinforce soft tissue where weakness exists and for the surgical repair of damaged or ruptured soft tissue membranes. It is specifically indicated for the repair of abdominal wall defects and hernias, including but not limited to parastomal hernias. | Intended for implantation to reinforce soft tissue where weakness exists. Indications for use include repair of a hernia or body wall defect. |
| Product Code | FTM, OXK | FTL | FTM, OXK |
### Table 5-1. Substantial Equivalence Information
{5}------------------------------------------------
| Device | Biodesign® Parastomal<br>Hernia Repair Graft | Permacol® Surgical<br>Implant | SIS Hernia Repair Graft<br>(reference device) |
|---------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Material | Porcine small intestinal<br>submucosa (extracellular<br>matrix - primarily collagen<br>types I, III, IV and VI) and<br>polyglycolic acid (PGA)<br>sutures | Porcine dermis<br>(extracellular matrix -<br>primarily collagen and<br>elastin). | Porcine small intestinal<br>submucosa (extracellular<br>matrix - primarily collagen<br>types I, III, IV and VI) and<br>polyglycolic acid (PGA)<br>sutures |
| Crosslinking | Non-crosslinked | Crosslinked (HMDI) | Non-crosslinked |
| Dimensions | 5 cm x 8 cm to 30 x 30 cm | 1 cm x 4 cm to 28 cm x 40<br>cm | 5 cm x 8 cm to 30 x 30 cm |
| Thickness | 0.1 mm to 1.5 mm | 0.5 mm to 1.5 mm | 0.1 mm to 1.5 mm |
| Sterilization | ethylene oxide | gamma irradiation | ethylene oxide |
| One-time Use | Yes | Yes | Yes |
## VII. PERFORMANCE DATA
### Biocompatibility:
The Biodesign® Parastomal Hernia Repair Graft is identical to the SIS Hernia Graft (i.e. same raw materials, manufacturing processes, configuration, packaging and sterilization). The following biocompatibility tests were performed on finished devices in accordance with the FDA's biocompatibility testing guidance Use of International Standard ISO-10993, 'Biological Evaluation of Medical Devices Part 1: Evaluation and Testing' (May 1, 1995):
- Cytotoxicity
- ISO sensitization ●
- Skin irritation
- Acute intracutaneous reactivity ●
- Acute systemic toxicity ●
- Pyrogenicity
- Subchronic systemic toxicity
- Genotoxicity ●
- Muscle implantation
- Direct contact in vitro hemolysis ●
- LAL endotoxins ●
Testing results show that the Biodesign® Parastomal Hernia Repair Graft meets all biocompatibility requirements of the ISO standard for permanent implantable devices. Product characterization - Mechanical:
The Biodesign® Parastomal Hernia Repair Graft is identical to the SIS Hernia Graft (i.e. same raw materials, manufacturing processes, configuration, packaging and sterilization). Mechanical testing was performed on finished devices to evaluate the mechanical performance of the device for its intended use. The following mechanical tests were performed in accordance with FDA's 'Guidance for the Preparation of a Premarket Notification Application for a Surgical Mesh' (March 2, 1999):
- Burst strength ●
- Ultimate tensile strength
- Device stiffness ●
- Suture retention strength ●
- Tear strength
- Delamination ●
{6}------------------------------------------------
Product characterization testing shows that the Biodesign® Parastomal Hernia Repair Graft provides adequate mechanical strength for use in the repair of abdominal wall defects and hernias, including but not limited to parastomal hernias.
## Safety and Performance - Clinical Data:
Clinical data to support the safety and performance of the Biodesign® Parastomal Hernia Repair Graft material for the surgical repair of abdominal wall defects and hernias, including parastomal hernias, is primarily in the form of peer-reviewed publications. The literature describes the safe and effective use of SIS-based devices to treat soft tissue deficiencies in the parastomal anatomy. Table 5-2 summarizes the results of a study published by Ellis using SIS for the repair of parastomal hernias.
| Study | Number<br>of<br>Patients | Follow-<br>up | Recurrence | Graft-Related<br>Complications | Comments |
|--------|--------------------------|------------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| EllisA | 20 | Median:<br>18<br>months;<br>Range:<br>6-38<br>months | Two (2)<br>recurrent<br>parastomal<br>hernias<br>identified<br>(10%) | There were four<br>(4) seromas in the<br>initial 10 patients.<br>Drains were then<br>routinely placed<br>in the final 12<br>procedures and no<br>additional<br>seromas were<br>reported. | Both recurrences were identified in<br>patients with complicated cases -<br>one with 12 previous repair<br>attempts and removal of infected<br>mesh, and one, in a patient with a<br>12 cm fascial defect. Although the<br>initial repair with SIS failed, both<br>patients were doing well (at 36 and<br>14 months) following a second<br>repair procedure with an SIS graft. |
Table 5-2. Surgical outcomes with the use of SIS for parastomal hernias
Unpublished long term data on 19/20 patients (same patient cohort described above four patients died of cancer, unrelated to their procedures) confirms, by physical or radiological (CT) examination, that the SIS-based devices perform as intended at a median follow-up time of 53 months (range 29-69 months). Three additional recurrences were identified, bringing the total recurrence rate to 25% (5/20 patients). Of the three recurrences diagnosed, two were asymptomatic and did not require additional surgical management at 58 and 47 month follow-up. The last recurrence occurred in a patient where an SIS graft was used to bridge the defect. After a second repair procedure with SIS, no recurrence was detected at 63 month follow-up. No other complications were reported.
## VIII. CONCLUSIONS
For purposes of determinations of substantial equivalence under section 513(i) of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. § 360c(i)), the Biodesign® Parastomal Hernia Repair Graft has the same intended use and functions under the same technological principle as the predicate device. The subject and predicate device are both porcine-derived scaffolds designed to provide mechanical reinforcement of soft tissues where weakness exists, while
A Ellis CN. Short-term outcomes with the use of bioprosthetics for the management of parastomal hernias. Diseases of the Colon and Rectum. 2010;53(3):279-283.
{7}------------------------------------------------
simultaneously being remodeled and replaced with host tissue. The main technological differences between the subject device and the predicate device are that the Biodesign Parastomal Hernia Repair Graft is composed of non-crosslinked SIS and the predicate device is composed of crosslinked dermal collagen.
. The biocompatibility tests, product characterization tests, and clinical data on the Biodesign® Parastomal Hernia Repair Graft demonstrate that the device is substantially equivalent to the predicate device.
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.