FDA Issues Draft Guidance for the Use of UHMWPE in Orthopedic Devices

| Printer friendly version

On February 12, 2016, the FDA issued draft guidance for the use of ultrahigh molecular weight polyethylene (UHMWPE) in orthopedic devices.  The draft guidance is open for public comment for the next 90 days.  According to the draft guidance, the recommendations apply to “class II and class III devices intended for orthopedic applications.”  The guidance applies to four types of UHMWPE materials: conventional UHMWPE, highly crosslinked UHMWPE (XLPE), Vitamin E highly crosslinked UHMWPE (VEPE), and non-conventional UHMWPE.

The draft guidance provides FDA recommendations on the “information and testing to submit in pre-market notifications (510(k)s), de novo requests, premarket approval (PMA) applications, humanitarian device exemptions (HDEs), and investigational device exemptions (IDEs).”  The draft guidance provides recommendations on reporting material characterization, biocompatability, and shelf life when submitting those documents.  A brief summary of some of these recommendations follows.

Material Testing:

[The FDA recommends characterizing] the following properties of the material: crosslink density, trans-vinylene index (TVI), oxidation index (OI), crystallinity, melting temperature, and free radical concentration. If the measured values lie within the normal range, determined by comparison to literature (i.e., for de novo, PMA, HDE, or IDE) or a predicate device with the same intended use (i.e., 510(k)), no additional information will typically be requested. However, for some properties, FDA recommends that certain results be achieved.

The draft guidance provides examples of properties where certain results should be achieved.  The draft guidance notes that some properties “are comparative in nature.  When submitted in a 510(k), the results should be compared to a predicate device with the same intended use.”


For Class II devices, if the subject device has identical UHMWPE materials and manufacturing processes as a predicate device, with the same type and duration of patient contact, [the FDA] recommend that you identify the predicate device as part of your biocompatibility evaluation in lieu of providing specific testing.

For other class II devices, de novos, and class III devices, the guidance directs the applicant to evaluate the device’s material based on Blue Book Memorandum #G95-1.

Shelf Life:

The FDA recommends not packaging “UHMWPE materials  containing unstable free radicals in air-permeable packaging because shelf-aging may degrade the mechanical properties of UHMWPE.”

Brandon Smith
Brandon Smith is an associate in our Orange County office. His practice is focused on patent litigation and prosecution. Mr. Smith earned his Bachelor's of Science in Biomedical Engineering at California Polytechnic University, San Luis Obispo. Mr. Smith received his J.D. from the University of San Diego School of Law where he was Editor-in-Chief of Volume 52 of the San Diego Law Review. Mr. Smith was a summer associate with the firm in 2014 and joined the firm as an associate in 2015.
Click here to read full bio
View all posts published by Brandon Smith »

Leave a Reply

By using this blog, you agree and understand that no information is being provided in the context of any attorney-client relationship. You further agree and understand that nothing herein is intended to be legal advice. This blog is solely informational in nature, and is not intended as, and should not be used as, a substitute for competent legal advice from a retained and licensed attorney in your state. Knobbe Martens LLP makes no representations or warranties as to the accuracy, completeness, timeliness or availability of the information in this blog. Knobbe Martens LLP will not be liable for any injury or damages relating to your use of, or access to, any such information. Knobbe Martens LLP undertakes no obligation to correct or update information on this blog, which may be incorrect or become incorrect or out of date over time. Knobbe Martens LLP reserves the right to alter or delete content or information on the blog at any time. This blog contains links and references to other websites and publications that you may find of interest. Knobbe Martens LLP does not control, promote, endorse or otherwise have any affiliation with any other websites or publications unless those websites or publications expressly state such an affiliation. Knobbe Martens LLP further has no responsibility for, and makes no representations regarding, the content, accuracy or any other aspect of the information in such websites or publications.