Recorded device evidence

LTM-Perforated Surgical Mesh (K150712): indications, design and recorded evidence

The acquired K150712 file contains product-specific indications and users, design and operating principle, recorded comparison and differences, performance evidence actually described sections. Compare these dated manufacturer statements with your own indication and design before commissioning evidence work. They describe this submission; they do not prescribe your testing, validate performance independently or establish a suitable predicate.

Evidence retrieved 2026-10-08. Source versions and topic-specific limits are listed below.

Computed exact-code research

This decision beside its recorded product-code cohort

The 2021–2025 complete-year cohort contains 10 selected decisions under primary code FTM. 10 have valid reported receipt/decision pairs; 0 pairs are missing or invalid.

No quartiles are displayed: this complete-year cohort has fewer than 20 valid pairs.

The table shows the named decision and up to four latest exact-code research records through 2026-09-27. It can include partial-year records outside the complete-year cohort. The quartiles above use the full stated cohort, not this displayed selection.

Research recordRecorded deviceReceipt → decisionCalendar elapsed daysRecorded submission type
K150712 ↗ · this pageLTM-Perforated Surgical Mesh2015-03-19 → 2015-07-02105Traditional
K262406 ↗EluPro Antibiotic-Eluting BioEnvelope2026-07-15 → 2026-08-1228Special
K250598 ↗Endoform Reconstructive Template - PLGA2025-02-28 → 2025-06-0395Traditional
K243595 ↗OviTex PRS (Long-Term Resorbable)2024-11-20 → 2024-12-1929Special
K233991 ↗CanGaroo RM Antibacterial Envelope2023-12-18 → 2024-06-14179Traditional

Use this comparison: select a record to investigate, read its actual indications and design, and document differences. A shared code or elapsed period cannot establish its relevance to your device.

Calendar elapsed days are not active FDA review time, a promised schedule or a success probability. The selection includes only the stated recorded decisions, not all applications. Latest records can postdate the named historical decision and are contextual research, not its predicates. Shared codes, summaries and observed records do not prove equivalence, current market availability, buyer applicability or predicate suitability.

Calculation, selection and source versions

Reuse the complete-endpoint exact-primary-code, documented SE-decision cohort and its stated cutoff/window. Retain its type-7 quartiles only when at least 20 valid date pairs are present. Independently subtract the named official record’s receipt date from its decision date; missing or negative pairs remain unknown. Show up to four latest exact-code research records, excluding the named ID. Parent analysis hash, source snapshots and calculation versions are retained.

Calculation: fda-named-decision-cohort-context-1; cutoff 2026-09-27; 0 parent records excluded; units record counts; calendar elapsed days.

Source snapshots: 5a86994ba49a37e71e09be96803fd51981c6c43eaa96caab41aea2b188bfe002.

Read beyond the decision row

Recorded evidence and differences to investigate

The summary is manufacturer-submitted context hosted by FDA. Negative/no-study statements are preserved. Evidence themes are not binding legal requirements.

Short opening excerpts identify the source sections. Read the linked original for the full study context, negative statements, tables and limitations. Public quotations are limited to 120 words per acquired summary; the internal evidence packet retains exact section ranges for review.

Indications and users

K150712 · PDF page 3 ↗ Source 2

Read this statement in the original PDF; no complete statement fits the short excerpt.

Compare with your product: Compare the recorded indication, population, body site and use environment with your proposed label. Record each change instead of assuming the primary code settles intended use.

Design and operating principle

K150712 · PDF page 5 ↗ Source 3

LTM-Perforated Surgical Mesh is a surgical mesh that is derived from porcine dermis and then
  processed and preserved in a patented phosphate buffered aqueous solution containing matrix
  stabilizers.

The excerpt is shortened at a complete statement. Read the complete section in the original PDF before interpreting the evidence.

Compare with your product: Compare physical design, materials, energy, accessories and operating principle with your design. Ask which documented differences change the evidence scope.

Recorded comparison and differences

K150712 · PDF page 5 ↗ Source 3

Read this statement in the original PDF; no complete statement fits the short excerpt.

Compare with your product: The summary’s comparison is a manufacturer statement about that submission. Investigate the actual design differences and cited records before considering any comparator or predicate.

Performance evidence actually described

K150712 · PDF page 6 ↗ Source 4

The predicate device, LTM-Surgical Mesh (K070560) has undergone appropriate biocompatibility
     testing, animal testing, and viral inactivation testing.

The excerpt is shortened at a complete statement. Read the complete section in the original PDF before interpreting the evidence.

Compare with your product: The source labels this section as performance data. Determine which described evidence is bench, software, biological or clinical from the actual narrative and original tables; the section label alone does not settle that distinction or prescribe your testing.

Extraction selection and limits

Select observed whole-line section headings or explicit colon-delimited inline labels on readable PDF pages, including the explicitly documented heading-spacing variants in this parser version. Preserve the original heading, character ranges and layout; do not repair excerpt text. Exclude letter boilerplate and uncertain pages. Stop at observed table headings; do not infer table columns or scalar results from layout text. Multi-column or suspicious split-numeric excerpts are excluded until reviewed alternate extraction is available. Original layout records remain retained; any alternate text has its own extractor-version locator and requires original-page review. For each dimension, prefer usable versioned alternate text where available, selecting its longest usable excerpt; otherwise select the longest usable original-layout excerpt. Ties preserve source order. Bounded to 64 PDF pages and 3,500 characters per section. This is a selection, not a complete dossier analysis.

Excluded extraction items: {}.

Known facts and deciding inputs

Known context: US. Confirm the organisation’s role, relevant activities and markets against the cited criteria.

Source factRecorded valueWhat to check
510(k) identifierK150712 [1]Dated official record fact; not proof of current commercial availability or applicability to another device.
Generic device categoryLTM-Perforated Surgical Mesh [1]Dated official record fact; not proof of current commercial availability or applicability to another device.
Recorded applicantLifecell Corporation [1]Dated official record fact; not proof of current commercial availability or applicability to another device.
FDA product codeFTM [1]Dated official record fact; not proof of current commercial availability or applicability to another device.
Decision date2015-07-02 [1]Dated official record fact; not proof of current commercial availability or applicability to another device.
Recorded decision codeSESE [1]Dated official record fact; not proof of current commercial availability or applicability to another device.
Submission typeTraditional [1]Dated official record fact; not proof of current commercial availability or applicability to another device.
Receipt date2015-03-19 [1]Dated official record fact; not proof of current commercial availability or applicability to another device.

Prepare a differences and evidence worksheet

Use this checklist to gather your business or product details before speaking with a specialist. The items below explain what to record and suggest useful supporting documents. You can add your own answers in the editable project brief.

  1. Indications and users — what differs in our product?

    Compare the recorded indication, population, body site and use environment with your proposed label. Record each change instead of assuming the primary code settles intended use.

    Useful evidence: Our proposed indication, user/population and use environment beside this exact recorded indication.

  2. Design and operating principle — what differs in our product?

    Compare physical design, materials, energy, accessories and operating principle with your design. Ask which documented differences change the evidence scope.

    Useful evidence: Design description, materials/components, accessory list and a differences matrix.

  3. Recorded comparison and differences — what differs in our product?

    The summary’s comparison is a manufacturer statement about that submission. Investigate the actual design differences and cited records before considering any comparator or predicate.

    Useful evidence: Feature-by-feature differences and the underlying cited documents; no automated predicate selection.

  4. Performance evidence actually described — what differs in our product?

    The source labels this section as performance data. Determine which described evidence is bench, software, biological or clinical from the actual narrative and original tables; the section label alone does not settle that distinction or prescribe your testing.

    Useful evidence: The cited narrative and full tables, underlying protocols/results and a reviewed comparison with the proposed product.

Work packages and dependencies

What needs to happen first

Questions for providers

Sources and data dates

Read the official document in context. The audit details identify the precise locators and preserved versions used for this page.

FDA openFDA — 510(k) decision records ↗

2026-10-05 · retrieved 2026-10-06

Audit details: precise locators and snapshot identifiers

Source key D01 · snapshot 5a86994ba49a37e71e09be96803fd51981c6c43eaa96caab41aea2b188bfe002

  • [1] device-510k-0001-of-0001.json:results[118104] · record e132fbb6c3b5c87736506b1e7e01abab7870604c3155db90260cad93fe62cdc1
  • [5] Complete results array / fda-decision-context:K150712 · record whole dataset partition

FDA 510(k) summary — K150712 ↗

Wed, 05 Aug 2015 14:04:17 GMT · retrieved 2026-10-08

Audit details: precise locators and snapshot identifiers

Source key D02 · snapshot da04cf187198fff1c617b0ffe1d7c35f67f32c5192fee7ef1f1a173ef0d73a2c

  • [2] PDF page 3 · record 22f61f83f956869203e036bf6c8270638e3ed5fca64b7a11ebf4ce818e74930a
  • [3] PDF page 5 · record def3266ac07ab73a5791c15cb214afb5c3f157ccf1ecec77ed1aba4addd0d717
  • [4] PDF page 6 · record 01502e1b28da9d5a56ab89c3fc7eb985021147ec993ffc530544abaaf3ec049a

Prepare an editable project brief

Confirm the facts, scope and contact preference before sharing your project. Preparing this page sends no provider outreach.

Choose work packages to discuss

Compare FDA 510(k) Submission Services

Biocompatibility Testing (ISO 10993 Program)