(89 days)
The Sensititre 18 - 24 hour MIC or Breakpoint Susceptibility System is an in vitro diagnostic product for clinical susceptibility testing of non fastidious isolates. This 5 IV(k) is for the newly approved Breakpoints for Telavancin, utilizing the 0.002% Polysorbate 80 for the reference method in the dilution range of 0.0005-2ug/ml to the Sensititee 18 - 24 hour MCC panel for terfeirences of on positive isolates. The approved primary "Indications for Use" and clinical significance for non-fastidious Gram positive isolates; Staphylococcus aureus (including methicillin-resistant isolates) Enterococcus faecalis
Not Found
The provided FDA 510(k) clearance letter does not contain the detailed study information required to answer your request in full. It primarily focuses on the regulatory aspects of the device's clearance. However, I can extract the acceptance criteria and a general overview of what the study was for from the document.
Here's an analysis of the available information:
1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance
The document states: "This 510(k) is for the newly approved Breakpoints for Telavancin, utilizing the 0.002% Polysorbate 80 for the reference method in the dilution range of 0.0005-2ug/ml to the Sensititre 18 - 24 hour MCC panel for terfeirences of on positive isolates."
This phrasing indicates that the acceptance criteria are tied to the concept of "newly approved Breakpoints for Telavancin." The study would have aimed to demonstrate that the Sensititre system's results align with these established breakpoints. The specific quantitative acceptance criteria (e.g., Categorical Agreement, Essential Agreement percentages) and the reported device performance (actual values achieved) are not detailed within this document. These would typically be found in the full 510(k) submission or associated clinical study reports, which are not provided here.
However, based on typical Antimicrobial Susceptibility Test (AST) device submissions, the acceptance criteria would generally revolve around:
- Essential Agreement (EA): The percentage of isolates for which the MIC (Minimum Inhibitory Concentration) value obtained by the test device is within plus or minus one doubling dilution of the reference method MIC.
- Categorical Agreement (CA): The percentage of isolates for which the interpretive category (Susceptible, Intermediate, or Resistant) obtained by the test device agrees with the interpretive category of the reference method.
- Major Errors (ME): Instances where the test device classifies an isolate as Susceptible when the reference method classifies it as Resistant.
- Very Major Errors (VME): Instances where the test device classifies an isolate as Resistant when the reference method classifies it as Susceptible.
- Minor Errors (mE): Instances where the test device classifies an isolate as Intermediate when the reference method classifies it as Susceptible or Resistant, or vice versa.
Without the actual study report, I cannot provide numerical values for the reported device performance against specific acceptance criteria.
2. Sample Size Used for the Test Set and Data Provenance
- Sample Size: The document does not specify the sample size (number of isolates) used in the test set.
- Data Provenance: The document does not specify the country of origin of the data or whether the study was retrospective or prospective. Typically, clinical studies for AST devices involve prospective collection of isolates from various clinical sites.
3. Number of Experts Used to Establish the Ground Truth for the Test Set and Qualifications of Those Experts
- This information is not provided in the document. For AST devices, the "ground truth" is typically established by a recognized reference method performed by trained microbiologists, rather than a panel of "experts" in the way it might be for image-based diagnostic AI.
4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set
- This information is not provided in the document. For AST devices, the reference method's result is generally considered the "gold standard," and complex adjudication methods like 2+1 or 3+1 are not typically used to establish ground truth for MIC values.
5. If a Multi-Reader Multi-Case (MRMC) Comparative Effectiveness Study was done
- An MRMC study is not applicable to this type of device. The Sensititre system is an automated or semi-automated system that provides an MIC value and interpretive category, not an image-based diagnostic that requires human interpretation. Therefore, a study comparing Human Readers with and without AI assistance is not relevant here.
6. If a Standalone (i.e., algorithm only without human-in-the-loop performance) was done
- The Sensititre system itself is the "standalone" device in this context. The study evaluates the performance of the system (including its reagents and methodology) against a recognized reference method. It's not an "algorithm only" in the sense of an AI model, but rather a complete diagnostic test system. The clearance is based on its standalone performance relative to the reference method.
7. The Type of Ground Truth Used
- The ground truth used is implicitly stated as the "reference method in the dilution range of 0.0005-2ug/ml". For AST devices, this typically refers to a standardized broth microdilution method (e.g., CLSI broth microdilution reference method) for determining the MIC.
8. The Sample Size for the Training Set
- This information is not applicable/not provided in the context of this device. The Sensititre system is not an AI/ML device that requires a "training set" in the conventional sense. Its performance is based on its established methodology and reagents, which are validated during manufacturing and clinical studies.
9. How the Ground Truth for the Training Set was Established
- This information is not applicable/not provided as there is no "training set" for this type of device.
In summary, the provided document offers limited details regarding the specifics of the performance study. It broadly indicates that the device was evaluated against reference methods to support the "newly approved Breakpoints for Telavancin." Comprehensive details on sample sizes, specific performance metrics (EA, CA, ME, VME), and the exact study methodology would be found in the complete 510(k) submission, which is not included here.
§ 866.1640 Antimicrobial susceptibility test powder.
(a)
Identification. An antimicrobial susceptibility test powder is a device that consists of an antimicrobial drug powder packaged in vials in specified amounts and intended for use in clinical laboratories for determining in vitro susceptibility of bacterial pathogens to these therapeutic agents. Test results are used to determine the antimicrobial agent of choice in the treatment of bacterial diseases.(b)
Classification. Class II (performance standards).