(445 days)
Epilaser Absolute is an over-the-counter device intended for adjunctive use with shaving for hair removal sustained with periodic treatments. Epilaser is also intended for permanent reduction in hair regrowth defined as a long-term, stable reduction in hair counts following a treatment regime. Permanent hair reduction is defined as long term, stable reduction in the number of hairs regrowing when measured out to 6, 9, and 12 months after the completion of the treatment regimen.
The Epilaser Absolute is an over-the-counter, hand-held, hair removal device. It kills the root of the hair follicle using laser energy at 808 or 980nm. The system is designed to be manually targeted onto individual hairs and the laser activates when it is pressed against the skin. A skin tone sensor ensures the user has the correct skin tone prior to laser activation.
Here's an analysis of the provided text regarding the acceptance criteria and study for the Epilaser Absolute. Unfortunately, the provided document does not contain the detailed performance study results that would allow for a complete answer to all your questions. The "Performance Data" section lists the types of tests performed but does not elaborate on the specific acceptance criteria for each test or the reported performance data against those criteria.
However, I can extract the available information and highlight what is missing.
Description of Device and Intended Use:
The Epilaser Absolute is an over-the-counter, hand-held hair removal device that uses 808 or 980nm laser energy to kill hair follicle roots. It is intended for adjunctive use with shaving for sustained hair removal with periodic treatments, and for permanent reduction in hair regrowth, defined as a long-term, stable reduction in hair counts at 6, 9, and 12 months post-treatment.
1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance
Given the provided document, specific numerical acceptance criteria and reported performance values are NOT available for most categories. The document lists the types of tests conducted but doesn't provide the detailed results against specific thresholds.
| Acceptance Criteria Category | Acceptance Criteria (from document) | Reported Device Performance (from document) |
|---|---|---|
| Hair Reduction Efficacy | Permanent reduction in hair regrowth defined as a long-term, stable reduction in hair counts following a treatment regime, measured at 6, 9, and 12 months after the completion of the treatment regimen. (Specific quantitative thresholds for "reduction" are not provided in this document) | Implicitly, the device met this, as it applied for "permanent reduction in hair regrowth." No specific percentage reduction or hair count data is provided. |
| Biocompatibility | Compliance with ISO 10993-5 (cytotoxicity) and ISO 10993-10 (sensitization and irritation) standards. (Specific pass/fail criteria from these standards apply) | Testing performed per ISO 10993-5 and ISO 10993-10. Implicitly passed to achieve substantial equivalence. No specific test results (e.g., irritation index) are provided. |
| Software Validation | Compliance with "Guidance for the Content of Premarket Submissions for Software Contained in Medical Devices." (Specific requirements for documentation, testing, and risk management apply) | Software documentation and validation performed. Implicitly met. No details on software bugs or validation metrics are provided. |
| Electrical/EMC/Laser Safety | Compliance with AAMI/EN 60601-1, AAMI/EN IEC 60601-1-2, IEC 62471, IEC 60825-1, and IEC 60335-2-23. (Specific safety limits and performance criteria from these standards apply) | Electrical, EMC, and laser safety testing performed. Implicitly passed. No specific measurements (e.g., leakage current, EMC emissions/immunity in dB) are provided. |
| Skin Tone Sensor Validation | Ensured the user has the correct skin tone prior to laser activation. (Specific accuracy/reliability metrics for skin tone detection are not provided) | Skin tone sensor validation performed. Implicitly met its purpose. No specific accuracy metrics (e.g., sensitivity, specificity for skin tones) are provided. |
| Self-selection and Usability (Human Factors) | Demonstrated continued OTC use, despite user interface modification. (Specific usability metrics like completion rates, error rates, SUS scores, or risk identified/mitigated are not provided) | Self-selection and usability human factors testing performed. Implicitly demonstrated continued OTC use. No specific human factors study results are detailed. |
Missing Information & Assumptions:
The document clearly states the conclusion that "Performance data demonstrate that the Epilaser Absolute is substantially equivalent to predicate devices." This implies that the device did meet relevant acceptance criteria for the tests listed, but it does not provide the criteria or the specific performance results themselves.
For the hair reduction efficacy, which is a primary claim, the document defines what "permanent reduction" means (long-term, stable reduction at 6, 9, and 12 months) but does not provide a quantitative acceptance criterion (e.g., "minimum 50% hair count reduction") or the actual percentage reduction achieved in any study.
Further Questions Based on Missing Information:
Without the full study report, it's impossible to answer the following questions with specific numbers.
2. Sample size used for the test set and the data provenance:
- Not provided. The document only mentions that tests were performed but does not specify sample sizes for any human-based studies (e.g., usability, hair reduction). Data provenance (country of origin, retrospective/prospective) is also not mentioned for any performance data.
3. Number of experts used to establish the ground truth for the test set and the qualifications of those experts:
- Not provided. This information would typically be relevant for studies involving subjective assessments (e.g., hair count assessment by dermatologists). Since the document does not detail the hair reduction study, this information is absent. For human factors, the "experts" would typically be representative users, and their qualifications are often basic literacy and comprehension.
4. Adjudication method (e.g., 2+1, 3+1, none) for the test set:
- Not provided. This would be relevant if there were subjective measurements requiring multiple opinions, such as assessments of hair count or adverse events.
5. 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:
- Not applicable/Not provided. This device is a direct-to-consumer laser hair removal device, not an AI-assisted diagnostic tool. Therefore, an MRMC study or AI-assistance comparison is not relevant to its type.
6. If a standalone (i.e. algorithm only without human-in-the-loop performance) was done:
- Not applicable/Not provided. This device is a user-operated laser system. Its "performance" inherently involves the user correctly operating it. It has a "skin tone sensor validation," which implies an algorithmic component, but no standalone performance metrics for just the algorithm are provided separate from the overall device performance.
7. The type of ground truth used (expert consensus, pathology, outcomes data, etc.):
- For hair reduction efficacy, the ground truth would likely involve hair counts (outcomes data) observed over time. How these counts were established (e.g., photography, expert assessment) is not specified.
- For other engineering tests (bio-compatibility, safety), the ground truth is often established by adherence to international standards and validated test methods.
8. The sample size for the training set:
- Not provided. Training sets are typically relevant for machine learning algorithms. While the skin tone sensor might have used a training set, the document does not provide any details about it.
9. How the ground truth for the training set was established:
- Not provided. As with point 8, this information is not present in the document.
In summary, while the document confirms that various tests were conducted to establish substantial equivalence for the Epilaser Absolute, it largely omits the specific quantitative acceptance criteria and the detailed performance results of those tests. This level of detail is typically found in the full 510(k) submission, not in the summary document provided.
{0}------------------------------------------------
Image /page/0/Picture/0 description: The image contains the logo of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). On the left is the Department of Health & Human Services logo. To the right of that is the FDA logo, which is a blue square with the letters "FDA" in white. To the right of the blue square is the text "U.S. FOOD & DRUG ADMINISTRATION" in blue.
December 13, 2022
Epilady 2000 LLC % John Smith Partner Hogan Lovells US LLP 555 Thirteenth Street, NW Washington, District of Columbia 20004-1109
Re: K213105
Trade/Device Name: Epilaser Absolute Regulation Number: 21 CFR 878.4810 Regulation Name: Laser surgical instrument for use in general and plastic surgery and in dermatology Regulatory Class: Class II Product Code: GEX Dated: November 10, 2022 Received: November 10, 2022
Dear John Smith:
We have reviewed your Section 510(k) premarket notification of intent to market the device referenced above and have determined the device is substantially equivalent (for the indications for use stated in the enclosure) to legally marketed predicate devices marketed in interstate commerce prior to May 28, 1976, the enactment date of the Medical Device Amendments, or to devices that have been reclassified in accordance with the provisions of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (Act) that do not require approval of a premarket approval application (PMA). You may, therefore, market the device, subject to the general controls provisions of the Act. Although this letter refers to your product as a device, please be aware that some cleared products may instead be combination products. The 510(k) Premarket Notification Database located at https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfpmn/pmn.cfm identifies combination product submissions. The general controls provisions of the Act include requirements for annual registration, listing of devices, good manufacturing practice, labeling, and prohibitions against misbranding and adulteration. Please note: CDRH does not evaluate information related to contract liability warranties. We remind you, however, that device labeling must be truthful and not misleading.
If your device is classified (see above) into either class II (Special Controls) or class III (PMA), it may be subject to additional controls. Existing major regulations affecting your device can be found in the Code of Federal Regulations, Title 21, Parts 800 to 898. In addition, FDA may publish further announcements concerning your device in the Federal Register.
Please be advised that FDA's issuance of a substantial equivalence determination does not mean that FDA has made a determination that your device complies with other requirements of the Act or any Federal
{1}------------------------------------------------
statutes and regulations administered by other Federal agencies. You must comply with all the Act's requirements, including, but not limited to: registration and listing (21 CFR Part 807); labeling (21 CFR Part 801); medical device reporting of medical device-related adverse events) (21 CFR 803) for devices or postmarketing safety reporting (21 CFR 4, Subpart B) for combination products (see https://www.fda.gov/combination-products/guidance-regulatory-information/postmarketing-safety-reportingcombination-products); good manufacturing practice requirements as set forth in the quality systems (QS) regulation (21 CFR Part 820) for devices or current good manufacturing practices (21 CFR 4, Subpart A) for combination products; and, if applicable, the electronic product radiation control provisions (Sections 531-542 of the Act); 21 CFR 1000-1050.
Also, please note the regulation entitled, "Misbranding by reference to premarket notification" (21 CFR Part 807.97). For questions regarding the reporting of adverse events under the MDR regulation (21 CFR Part 803), please go to https://www.fda.gov/medical-device-safety/medical-device-reportingmdr-how-report-medical-device-problems.
For comprehensive regulatory information about medical devices and radiation-emitting products, including information about labeling regulations, please see Device Advice (https://www.fda.gov/medicaldevices/device-advice-comprehensive-regulatory-assistance) and CDRH Learn (https://www.fda.gov/training-and-continuing-education/cdrh-learn). Additionally, you may contact the Division of Industry and Consumer Education (DICE) to ask a question about a specific regulatory topic. See the DICE website (https://www.fda.gov/medical-device-advice-comprehensive-regulatoryassistance/contact-us-division-industry-and-consumer-education-dice) for more information or contact DICE by email (DICE@fda.hhs.gov) or phone (1-800-638-2041 or 301-796-7100).
Sincerely.
Jianting Wang -S
Jianting Wang Acting Assistant Director DHT4A: Division of General Surgery Devices OHT4: Office of Surgical and Infection Control Devices Office of Product Evaluation and Quality Center for Devices and Radiological Health
Enclosure
{2}------------------------------------------------
Indications for Use
510(k) Number (if known) K213105
Device Name Epilaser Absolute
Indications for Use (Describe)
Epilaser Absolute is an over-the-counter device intended for adjunctive use with shaving for hair removal sustained with periodic treatments. Epilaser is also intended for permanent reduction in hair regrowth defined as a long-term, stable reduction in hair counts following a treatment regime. Permanent hair reduction is defined as long term, stable reduction in the number of hairs regrowing when measured out to 6, 9, and 12 months after the completion of the treatment regimen.
| Type of Use (Select one or both, as applicable) | |
|---|---|
| ------------------------------------------------- | -- |
Prescription Use (Part 21 CFR 801 Subpart D)
|X | Over-The-Counter Use (21 CFR 801 Subpart C)
CONTINUE ON A SEPARATE PAGE IF NEEDED.
This section applies only to requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.
DO NOT SEND YOUR COMPLETED FORM TO THE PRA STAFF EMAIL ADDRESS BELOW.
The burden time for this collection of information is estimated to average 79 hours per response, including the time to review instructions, search existing data sources, gather and maintain the data needed and complete and review the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this information collection, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to:
Department of Health and Human Services Food and Drug Administration Office of Chief Information Officer Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) Staff PRAStaff(@fda.hhs.gov
"An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB number."
{3}------------------------------------------------
K213105 510(k) SUMMARY
Epilady 2000's Epilaser Absolute
Submitter
Epilady 2000 LLC 3 Hacharash St., Industrial Zone Hazor Haglilit, Israel 1035102
Moshe Rosenthal, CEO (p) +972 4 686 0400 (f) +972 4 686 0500 moshe@agrolan.co.il
Date Prepared: November 10, 2022
Device Trade Name: Epilaser Absolute
Common or Usual Name: Powered laser surgical instrument
Classification Name: 21 CFR 878.4810, Class II, GEX , Laser surgical instrument for use in general
and plastic surgery and in dermatology
Predicate Devices
K170790 Epilaser
K141063 LinScan System
Device Description
The Epilaser Absolute is an over-the-counter, hand-held, hair removal device. It kills the root of the hair follicle using laser energy at 808 or 980nm. The system is designed to be manually targeted onto individual hairs and the laser activates when it is pressed against the skin. A skin tone sensor ensures the user has the correct skin tone prior to laser activation.
{4}------------------------------------------------
Indications for Use
Epilaser Absolute is an over-the-counter device intended for adjunctive use with shaving for hair removal sustained with periodic treatments. Epilaser is also intended for permanent reduction in hair regrowth defined as a long-term, stable reduction in hair counts following a treatment regime. Permanent hair reduction is defined as long term, stable reduction in the number of hairs regrowing when measured out to 6, 9, and 12 months after the completion of the treatment regimen.
Summary of Technological Characteristics
Both the Epilaser Absolute and its predicates use light energy for permanent hair reduction. The primary difference between the originally cleared Epilaser and the subject Epilaser Absolute are the addition of a 980 nm model and a modification to the user interface. Use of 980 nm light to permanently remove hair in darker skin types has been cleared in many other laser systems, including the Linscan System (K141063). The Absolute has a spot size, peak power, fluence, and pulse duration within the range or lower than what has been cleared for the predicates. The company has performed laser safety testing per IEC 60601-2-22 and IEC 60825-1 to show continued safety of the modified laser systems.
The user interface differs between original Epilaser and the Absolute. Although the user interface has been modified as compared to the predicate Epilaser (K170790), the interface has been significantly simplified. This is consistent with the activation mechanism used by the TRIA (K120737). The company has performed usability testing to demonstrate continued OTC use.
Performance Data
The following tests were conducted to establish substantial equivalence:
- . Biocompatibility testing per ISO 10993-5 (cytotoxicity) and ISO 10993-10 (sensitization and irritation).
- . Software documentation and validation per "Guidance for the Content of Premarket Submissions for Software Contained in Medical Devices".
- Electrical, EMC, and laser safety testing per AAMI/EN 60601-1, AAMI/EN IEC . 60601-1-2, IEC 62471, IEC 60825-1, and IEC 60335-2-23.
- Skin tone sensor validation .
- Self-selection and usability human factors testing ●
Conclusions
The Epilaser Absolute has the same intended use and similar indications, technological characteristics, and principles of operation as its predicate devices. The minor differences in technical characteristics do not raise different questions of safety and effectiveness when used as labeled. Performance data demonstrate that the Epilaser Absolute is substantially equivalent to predicate devices.
§ 878.4810 Laser surgical instrument for use in general and plastic surgery and in dermatology.
(a)
Identification. (1) A carbon dioxide laser for use in general surgery and in dermatology is a laser device intended to cut, destroy, or remove tissue by light energy emitted by carbon dioxide.(2) An argon laser for use in dermatology is a laser device intended to destroy or coagulate tissue by light energy emitted by argon.
(b)
Classification. (1) Class II.(2) Class I for special laser gas mixtures used as a lasing medium for this class of lasers. The devices subject to this paragraph (b)(2) are exempt from the premarket notification procedures in subpart E of part 807 of this chapter, subject to the limitations in § 878.9.