(204 days)
The Dual Lumen ELC catheters are peripheral venous access catheters, inserted preferably in the basilic vein (arm) and antecubital region respectively, and specifically for use with the System 100. The catheter is not intended for the infusion of medications or fluids, for laboratory sampling, or other venous access needs. The System 100 is indicated for temporary (up to 8 hours) ultrafiltration treatment of patients with fluid overload.
The dELC is a 6 French, polyurethane, dual lumen extended-length catheter. It is intended to provide short-term peripheral venous access to facilitate blood removal and return for the purposes of ultrafiltration. The catheter has a low profile, flexible hub with suture wings for securement to the skin. The dual lumen tubing in the proximal portion of the catheter shaft is a double-D configuration and is bonded to a single lumen tube for the distal portion. The blood is drawn up through the single lumen tubing, and infused back into the vessel through the short proximal section of the catheter shaft. The catheter will connect directly to the UF circuit of the System 100 to conduct blood to and from the patient for the purposes of ultrafiltration.
The provided text is a 510(k) summary for a medical device called the "Dual-Lumen Extended Length Catheter (dELC)". It describes the device, its intended use, and states that bench tests demonstrate its compatibility with the System 100. However, it does not include information about specific acceptance criteria or a detailed study proving the device meets those criteria, as typically found in clinical trials or performance studies. The document primarily focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence to predicate devices based on design, materials, packaging, sterilization, and limited bench testing.
Therefore, many of the requested details about acceptance criteria, study design, sample sizes, ground truth establishment, expert involvement, and comparative effectiveness studies are not present in this 510(k) summary.
Here's a breakdown of what can be extracted and what cannot:
Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance
| Acceptance Criteria | Reported Device Performance |
|---|---|
| Not explicitly stated as quantitative acceptance criteria | "Bench tests demonstrate the Dual-Lumen ELC is compatible with the System 100." (General statement, no specific metrics provided) |
| Safety | "The Dual-Lumen ELC and predicate devices are similar in materials of construction and identical for packaging and sterilization. The Dual-Lumen ELC is provided sterile and nonpyrogenic." |
| Effectiveness for intended use | "Based on the intended use, technology characteristics and bench testing, the new access catheter has been shown to be safe and effective for its intended use." (General statement, not tied to specific performance metrics) |
Study Details (Based on available information)
-
Sample size used for the test set and the data provenance (e.g., country of origin of the data, retrospective or prospective):
- Not provided. The document only mentions "bench tests," which are typically laboratory-based and do not involve human patient data in the context of this 510(k) summary. No details on the number of samples or data provenance are given.
-
Number of experts used to establish the ground truth for the test set and the qualifications of those experts (e.g., radiologist with 10 years of experience):
- Not applicable/Not provided. Since "bench tests" are mentioned for compatibility, there's no indication of a test set requiring expert-established ground truth in the traditional sense of diagnostic or clinical performance studies.
-
Adjudication method (e.g., 2+1, 3+1, none) for the test set:
- Not applicable/Not provided. As stated above, this type of adjudication is typically for clinical or diagnostic performance studies, which are not described here.
-
If a multi reader multi case (MRMC) comparative effectiveness study was done, If so, what was the effect size of how much human readers improve with AI vs without AI assistance:
- No. This device is a physical medical catheter, not an AI-powered diagnostic tool. Therefore, an MRMC study related to AI assistance for human readers is not relevant and was not conducted.
-
If a standalone (i.e., algorithm only without human-in-the-loop performance) was done:
- Not applicable. This is a physical medical device, not an algorithm.
-
The type of ground truth used (expert consensus, pathology, outcomes data, etc.):
- Not applicable/Not provided. For the "bench tests" mentioned, the "ground truth" would likely be the physical properties and functional performance of the catheter according to engineering specifications and compatibility with the System 100. This is not explicitly detailed.
-
The sample size for the training set:
- Not applicable/Not provided. There is no mention of a "training set" as this is not an AI/machine learning device.
-
How the ground truth for the training set was established:
- Not applicable/Not provided. There is no training set for this type of device.
Summary of Device and Evidence Presented in 510(k):
The 510(k) submission for the Dual-Lumen Extended Length Cathether (dELC) demonstrates its substantial equivalence to predicate devices (B. Braun Accuguide®, CHF Solutions System 100, and medComp® VASCU-PICC™ and Duo-Flow™) by:
- Being similar in materials of construction.
- Being identical for packaging and sterilization.
- Being provided sterile and nonpyrogenic.
- Having "bench tests" that demonstrate compatibility with the System 100.
The document uses these points to conclude that the device is "safe and effective for its intended use" for temporary peripheral venous access for ultrafiltration treatments for patients with fluid overload, and is therefore "substantially equivalent" to legally marketed predicate devices. The evidence presented focuses on design, materials, manufacturing processes, and general functional compatibility rather than detailed quantitative performance metrics from a formal "study" with set acceptance criteria in the clinical sense.
§ 876.5540 Blood access device and accessories.
(a)
Identification. A blood access device and accessories is a device intended to provide access to a patient's blood for hemodialysis or other chronic uses. When used in hemodialysis, it is part of an artificial kidney system for the treatment of patients with renal failure or toxemic conditions and provides access to a patient's blood for hemodialysis. The device includes implanted blood access devices, nonimplanted blood access devices, and accessories for both the implanted and nonimplanted blood access devices.(1) The implanted blood access device is a prescription device and consists of various flexible or rigid tubes, such as catheters, or cannulae, which are surgically implanted in appropriate blood vessels, may come through the skin, and are intended to remain in the body for 30 days or more. This generic type of device includes various catheters, shunts, and connectors specifically designed to provide access to blood. Examples include single and double lumen catheters with cuff(s), fully subcutaneous port-catheter systems, and A-V shunt cannulae (with vessel tips). The implanted blood access device may also contain coatings or additives which may provide additional functionality to the device.
(2) The nonimplanted blood access device consists of various flexible or rigid tubes, such as catheters, cannulae or hollow needles, which are inserted into appropriate blood vessels or a vascular graft prosthesis (§§ 870.3450 and 870.3460), and are intended to remain in the body for less than 30 days. This generic type of device includes fistula needles, the single needle dialysis set (coaxial flow needle), and the single needle dialysis set (alternating flow needle).
(3) Accessories common to either type include the shunt adaptor, cannula clamp, shunt connector, shunt stabilizer, vessel dilator, disconnect forceps, shunt guard, crimp plier, tube plier, crimp ring, joint ring, fistula adaptor, and declotting tray (including contents).
(b)
Classification. (1) Class II (special controls) for the implanted blood access device. The special controls for this device are:(i) Components of the device that come into human contact must be demonstrated to be biocompatible. Material names and specific designation numbers must be provided.
(ii) Performance data must demonstrate that the device performs as intended under anticipated conditions of use. The following performance characteristics must be tested:
(A) Pressure versus flow rates for both arterial and venous lumens, from the minimum flow rate to the maximum flow rate in 100 milliliter per minute increments, must be established. The fluid and its viscosity used during testing must be stated.
(B) Recirculation rates for both forward and reverse flow configurations must be established, along with the protocol used to perform the assay, which must be provided.
(C) Priming volumes must be established.
(D) Tensile testing of joints and materials must be conducted. The minimum acceptance criteria must be adequate for its intended use.
(E) Air leakage testing and liquid leakage testing must be conducted.
(F) Testing of the repeated clamping of the extensions of the catheter that simulates use over the life of the device must be conducted, and retested for leakage.
(G) Mechanical hemolysis testing must be conducted for new or altered device designs that affect the blood flow pattern.
(H) Chemical tolerance of the device to repeated exposure to commonly used disinfection agents must be established.
(iii) Performance data must demonstrate the sterility of the device.
(iv) Performance data must support the shelf life of the device for continued sterility, package integrity, and functionality over the requested shelf life that must include tensile, repeated clamping, and leakage testing.
(v) Labeling of implanted blood access devices for hemodialysis must include the following:
(A) Labeling must provide arterial and venous pressure versus flow rates, either in tabular or graphical format. The fluid and its viscosity used during testing must be stated.
(B) Labeling must specify the forward and reverse recirculation rates.
(C) Labeling must provide the arterial and venous priming volumes.
(D) Labeling must specify an expiration date.
(E) Labeling must identify any disinfecting agents that cannot be used to clean any components of the device.
(F) Any contraindicated disinfecting agents due to material incompatibility must be identified by printing a warning on the catheter. Alternatively, contraindicated disinfecting agents must be identified by a label affixed to the patient's medical record and with written instructions provided directly to the patient.
(G) Labeling must include a patient implant card.
(H) The labeling must contain comprehensive instructions for the following:
(
1 ) Preparation and insertion of the device, including recommended site of insertion, method of insertion, and a reference on the proper location for tip placement;(
2 ) Proper care and maintenance of the device and device exit site;(
3 ) Removal of the device;(
4 ) Anticoagulation;(
5 ) Management of obstruction and thrombus formation; and(
6 ) Qualifications for clinical providers performing the insertion, maintenance, and removal of the devices.(vi) In addition to Special Controls in paragraphs (b)(1)(i) through (v) of this section, implanted blood access devices that include subcutaneous ports must include the following:
(A) Labeling must include the recommended type of needle for access as well as detailed instructions for care and maintenance of the port, subcutaneous pocket, and skin overlying the port.
(B) Performance testing must include results on repeated use of the ports that simulates use over the intended life of the device.
(C) Clinical performance testing must demonstrate safe and effective use and capture any adverse events observed during clinical use.
(vii) In addition to Special Controls in paragraphs (b)(1)(i) through (v) of this section, implanted blood access devices with coatings or additives must include the following:
(A) A description and material characterization of the coating or additive material, the purpose of the coating or additive, duration of effectiveness, and how and where the coating is applied.
(B) An identification in the labeling of any coatings or additives and a summary of the results of performance testing for any coating or material with special characteristics, such as decreased thrombus formation or antimicrobial properties.
(C) A Warning Statement in the labeling for potential allergic reactions including anaphylaxis if the coating or additive contains known allergens.
(D) Performance data must demonstrate efficacy of the coating or additive and the duration of effectiveness.
(viii) The following must be included for A-V shunt cannulae (with vessel tips):
(A) The device must comply with Special Controls in paragraphs (b)(1)(i) through (v) of this section with the exception of paragraphs (b)(1)(ii)(B), (b)(1)(ii)(C), (b)(1)(v)(B), and (b)(1)(v)(C), which do not apply.
(B) Labeling must include Warning Statements to address the potential for vascular access steal syndrome, arterial stenosis, arterial thrombosis, and hemorrhage including exsanguination given that the device accesses the arterial circulation.
(C) Clinical performance testing must demonstrate safe and effective use and capture any adverse events observed during clinical use.
(2) Class II (performance standards) for the nonimplanted blood access device.
(3) Class II (performance standards) for accessories for both the implanted and the nonimplanted blood access devices not listed in paragraph (b)(4) of this section.
(4) Class I for the cannula clamp, disconnect forceps, crimp plier, tube plier, crimp ring, and joint ring, accessories for both the implanted and nonimplanted blood access device. The devices subject to this paragraph (b)(4) are exempt from the premarket notification procedures in subpart E of part 807 of this chapter subject to the limitations in § 876.9.