K-numberK253003
Device nameNon-sterile Level 3 Surgical Gown (4025); Sterile Level 3 Surgical Gown (M4025); Non-sterile Reinforced Level 4 Surgical Gown (G4025); Reinforced Sterile Level 4 Surgical Gown (GM4025)
ApplicantHubei Xinxin Non-Woven Co., Ltd.
Product codeFYA
Device classClass II
Decision dateApr 20, 2026
DecisionSubstantially Equivalent
Regulation878.4040
AI Summary extracted from FDA summary PDF · never regenerated
Intended use

These are disposable surgical gowns in four models (non-sterile and sterile versions of Level 3 and reinforced Level 4 gowns) intended to be worn by operating room personnel during surgical and invasive procedures to protect both patients and staff from transfer of microorganisms, body fluids, and particulate material. Non-sterile versions are sold in bulk for terminal sterilization via ethylene oxide before end-user distribution.

Technological characteristics

The proposed device uses SMS (spunbond-meltblown-spunbond) non-woven fabric with PET cuffs and SPP neckties, compared to the predicate's SMS and polyester materials. Weight differs (36 g/m² vs. 45 g/m² for Level 3; reinforced versions use 36+30+45 g/m² vs. predicate's 45+25 g/m²). The proposed device's breaking and tearing strengths exceed or meet predicate values. Both achieve Level 3 or Level 4 barrier classification per ANSI/AAMI PB70:2022.

Test standards cited

ASTM F1671/F1671M-2022 (pathogen penetration), AATCC 127-2018e (hydrostatic pressure), AATCC TM42-2017 (water impact), ASTM D5034-2021 (breaking strength), ASTM D5587-2015(2024) (tearing strength), ASTM D1683/D1683M-2022 (seam strength), ISO 9073-10-2003 (linting), 16 CFR Part 1610 (flammability), ANSI/AAMI PB70:2022 (barrier classification), ASTM F2407/F2407M-2023 (acceptance criteria), ISO 10993-5/10/7 (biocompatibility).

Substantial equivalence argument

The proposed gowns are substantially equivalent because they share identical intended use, same regulatory classification (Class II, FYA), same sterilization method (ethylene oxide, SAL 10⁻⁶), and equivalent or superior performance in all critical barrier protection tests (Level 3 and Level 4 per ANSI/AAMI PB70:2022). Material and weight differences do not affect safety or effectiveness, as demonstrated by passing biocompatibility and performance testing to applicable standards. The devices meet or exceed predicate specifications for flammability, hydrostatic pressure, water impact, breaking strength, tearing strength, linting, and pathogen penetration.

Extracted by AI from the official FDA summary PDF →
Source

View the full FDA submission: accessdata.fda.gov

Researching this as a predicate?
Want a transparent AI-ranking score, AI-discovered related predicates, ongoing safety and warning-letter monitoring, full predicate chain lineage, and a drafted SE rationale — all saved to your own project? That's what an account adds.
Start free trial →

Everything you need for a 510(k) submission. Nothing you don't.

14-day free trial. No setup. Cancel anytime.

Start free trial →
Building an AI or ML-enabled device? Predicate search, PCCP tracking, and AI-specific FDA intelligence — built exclusively for AI/ML devices. Try AIFDA Intel →