(121 days)
No
The description focuses on traditional EEG source localization methods (LORETA, sLORETA, MSP) and algorithmic testing against known analytical solutions and a predicate device. There is no mention of AI, ML, deep learning, or training/test sets in the context of learning from data to improve performance.
No
The device is described as "EEG source localization software" for "visualization of human brain function". Its purpose is to estimate and visualize brain activity, and it does not directly treat or alleviate a disease or condition. The clinical performance testing focuses on localization accuracy and comparison to a predicate device, not on therapeutic efficacy.
Yes
The software is intended for visualization of human brain function by fusing EEG information with rendered images of an idealized head model and MRI. It is used to estimate and visualize cortex projections of human brain activity. The "Clinical Performance Testing" section details its use in epileptic patients to perform Electrical Source Imaging (ESI) to compare with resected regions and clinical outcomes, which indicates its use in aiding diagnosis or treatment planning.
Yes
The device description explicitly states "Sourcerer is an EEG source localization software" and describes its function as software processing EEG and MRI data. The client-server model and visualization in a browser further support its software-only nature. While it uses data from hardware (EEG and MRI), the device itself is the software that processes and visualizes this data.
Based on the provided information, this device is not an IVD (In Vitro Diagnostic).
Here's why:
- Intended Use: The intended use is for the "visualization of human brain function by fusing a variety of EEG information with rendered images of an idealized head model and an idealized MRI image." This describes a tool for visualizing and analyzing physiological signals (EEG) in the context of anatomical information, not for performing tests on biological specimens (like blood, urine, or tissue) to diagnose a disease or condition.
- Device Description: The description focuses on EEG source localization and visualization, which is a method for understanding brain activity based on electrical signals measured on the scalp. This is distinct from in vitro testing.
- Input Data: The primary input is "hdEEG data," which is a physiological measurement from a living subject, not a biological specimen.
- Lack of IVD Characteristics: The description does not mention any of the typical characteristics of an IVD, such as:
- Testing biological specimens.
- Providing diagnostic results based on the analysis of biological specimens.
- Measuring analytes in biological samples.
While the device is used in a clinical setting and can provide information relevant to a patient's condition (like in the epilepsy study), its function is to process and visualize physiological data, not to perform in vitro diagnostic tests. The clinical performance testing compares its ability to localize brain activity to a predicate device that also performs EEG source localization, further supporting its classification as a device for analyzing physiological signals rather than an IVD.
N/A
Intended Use / Indications for Use
The software is intended for use by a trained/qualified EEG technologist or physician on both adult and pediatric subjects at least 16 years of age for the visualization of human brain function by fusing a variety of EEG information with rendered images of an idealized head model and an idealized MRI image.
Product codes
OLX
Device Description
Sourcerer is an EEG source localization software that uses EEG and MRI-derived information to estimate and visualize cortex projections of human brain activity. Sourcerer is designed in a client-server model wherein the server components integrate directly with FLOW - BEL's software. Inverse source projections are computed on the server using EEG and MRI data from FLOW using the Electro-magnetic Inverse Module (EMIM API). The inverse results are interactively visualized in the Chrome browser running on the client computer using the Electro-magnetic Functional Anatomy Viewer (EMFAV). EMFAV is hosted on FLOW's web server, from which the client computer can make requests when opening an MFF file using Sourcerer.
Mentions image processing
Not Found
Mentions AI, DNN, or ML
Not Found
Input Imaging Modality
EEG, MRI
Anatomical Site
human brain
Indicated Patient Age Range
adult and pediatric subjects at least 16 years of age
Intended User / Care Setting
trained/qualified EEG technologist or physician
Description of the training set, sample size, data source, and annotation protocol
Not Found
Description of the test set, sample size, data source, and annotation protocol
Algorithmic testing of HexaFEM and Inverse methods:
- HexaFEM: Comparison of a three-layer sphere between HexaFEM and Spherical Analytics showed that the HexaFEM solutions are consistent with the analytical solutions for the three-layer spherical model. HexaFEM and FDM solutions for one realistic head model using the same conductivity values showed that the HexaFEM and the FDM solutions are the same.
- Inverse Model (EMIM Module): The inverse solvers were tested using test files with known signal sources. The known signals are from the forward projection, using an atlas head model, of current from each dipole to the scalp. The scalp data from the forward projections signals, with no noise added per standard procedure from scientific literature, were then used to recover the source generator (known) with the various inverse solvers.
Summary of Performance Studies (study type, sample size, AUC, MRMC, standalone performance, key results)
- Algorithmic testing of HexaFEM and Inverse methods:
- HexaFEM: Comparison of a three-layer sphere between HexaFEM and Spherical Analytics showed that the HexaFEM solutions are consistent with the analytical solutions for the three-layer spherical model. HexaFEM and FDM solutions for one realistic head model using the same conductivity values showed that the HexaFEM and the FDM solutions are the same.
- Inverse Model (EMIM Module): Results are quantified as localization error distance.
- LORETA: The average localization error is about 7 mm.
- sLORETA: Source estimation results are exact for the simulated signal sources.
- MSP: The results show 100% (zero localization error).
- Clinical Performance Testing:
- Study Type: Clinical data obtained from epileptic patients during standard presurgical evaluation.
- Data Source: hdEEG (256 channels) data, resected region (from MRI), and clinical outcome.
- Protocol: ESI was performed on an average inter-ictal spike derived from each patient's pre-operative hdEEG recording in both Sourcerer and GeoSource. For each patient, the Euclidian distance between the location of maximal amplitude and the nearest voxel of the resected boundary was calculated for both devices.
- Key Results: Performance of Sourcerer was shown to be equivalent to GeoSource.
- Software Verification and Validation Testing: Validation testing involved algorithm testing which validated the accuracy of Sourcerer. The product was deemed fit for clinical use.
Key Metrics (Sensitivity, Specificity, PPV, NPV, etc.)
- LORETA: The average localization error is about 7 mm.
- sLORETA: Source estimation results are exact for the simulated signal sources.
- MSP: The results show 100% (zero localization error).
Predicate Device(s)
Reference Device(s)
Not Found
Predetermined Change Control Plan (PCCP) - All Relevant Information
Not Found
§ 882.1400 Electroencephalograph.
(a)
Identification. An electroencephalograph is a device used to measure and record the electrical activity of the patient's brain obtained by placing two or more electrodes on the head.(b)
Classification. Class II (performance standards).
0
September 27, 2024
Image /page/0/Picture/1 description: The image shows the logo of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). On the left is the Department of Health and 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.
Brain Electrophysiology Laboratory Company, LLC Phan Luu Chief Scientist 1776 Millrace Drive Suite 304 Eugene, Oregon 97403
Re: K241513
Trade/Device Name: Sourcerer Regulation Number: 21 CFR 882.1400 Regulation Name: Electroencephalograph Regulatory Class: Class II Product Code: OLX Dated: August 28, 2024 Received: August 28, 2024
Dear Dr. Luu:
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 (the 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 available 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.
Additional information about changes that may require a new premarket notification are provided in the FDA guidance documents entitled "Deciding When to Submit a 510(k) for a Change to an Existing Device"
1
(https://www.fda.gov/media/99812/download) and "Deciding When to Submit a 510(k) for a Software Change to an Existing Device" (https://www.fda.gov/media/99785/download).
Your device is also subject to, among other requirements, the Quality System (QS) regulation (21 CFR Part 820), which includes, but is not limited to, 21 CFR 820.30. Design controls; 21 CFR 820.90. Nonconforming product; and 21 CFR 820.100, Corrective and preventive action. Please note that regardless of whether a change requires premarket review. the OS regulation requires device manufacturers to review and approve changes to device design and production (21 CFR 820.30 and 21 CFR 820.70) and document changes and approvals in the device master record (21 CFR 820.181).
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 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 Part 803) for devices or postmarketing safety reporting (21 CFR Part 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 Part 4, Subpart A) for combination products; and, if applicable, the electronic product radiation control provisions (Sections 531-542 of the Act); 21 CFR Parts 1000-1050.
All medical devices, including Class I and unclassified devices and combination product device constituent parts are required to be in compliance with the final Unique Device Identification System rule ("UDI Rue"). The UDI Rule requires, among other things, that a device bear a unique device identifier (UDI) on its label and package (21 CFR 801.20(a)) unless an exception or alternative applies (21 CFR 801.20(b)) and that the dates on the device label be formatted in accordance with 21 CFR 801.18. The UDI Rule (21 CFR 830.300(a) and 830.320(b)) also requires that certain information be submitted to the Global Unique Device Identification Database (GUDID) (21 CFR Part 830 Subpart E). For additional information on these requirements, please see the UDI System webpage at https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/device-advicecomprehensive-regulatory-assistance/unique-device-identification-system-udi-system.
Also, please note the regulation entitled, "Misbranding by reference to premarket notification" (21 CFR 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 mediation-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).
2
Sincerely,
Jay R. Gupta -S
Jay Gupta Assistant Director DHT5A: Division of Neurosurgical, Neurointerventional, and Neurodiagnostic Devices OHT5: Office of Neurological and Physical Medicine Devices Office of Product Evaluation and Quality Center for Devices and Radiological Health
Enclosure
3
Indications for Use
510(k) Number (if known) K241513
Device Name Sourcerer
Indications for Use (Describe)
The software is intended for use by a trained/qualified EEG technologist or physician on both adult and pediatric subjects at least 16 years of age for the visualization of human brain function by fusing a variety of EEG information with rendered images of an idealized head model and an idealized MRI image.
Type of Use (Select one or both, as applicable)
| Prescription Use (Part 21 CFR 801 Subpart D) | 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."
4
510(K) Summary
| 1. SUBMITTER | |
|---|---|
| Submitter Name: | |
| Address: | |
| Phone Number: | |
| Contact Person: | |
| Date Prepared: | Brain Electrophysiology Laboratory Company, LLC |
| 1776 Millrace Drive, Eugene, OR 97403 | |
| 541-653-9797 | |
| Dr. Phan Luu | |
| June 10 2024 | |
| 2. DEVICE | |
| Device Trade Name: | |
| Common Name: | |
| Classification Name, | |
| Number & | |
| Product Code: | |
| Class: | |
| Classification Panel: | Sourcerer |
| Electroencephalograph Software | |
| Electroencephalograph | |
| 21 CFR 882.1400 | |
| OLX | |
| II | |
| Neurology | |
| 3. PREDICATE DEVICES | |
| Primary Predicate Device: | |
| Intended use: | K092844 |
| GeoSource is intended for use by a | |
| trained/qualified EEG technologist or physician on | |
| both adult and pediatric subjects at least 3 years of | |
| age for the visualization of human brain function by | |
| fusing a variety of EEG information with rendered | |
| images of an idealized head model and an | |
| idealized MRI image. |
4. DEVICE DESCRIPTION
Sourcerer is an EEG source localization software that uses EEG and MRI-derived information to estimate and visualize cortex projections of human brain activity. Sourcerer is designed in a client-server model wherein the server components integrate directly with FLOW - BEL's software. Inverse source projections are computed on the server using EEG and MRI data from FLOW using the Electro-magnetic Inverse Module (EMIM API). The inverse results are interactively visualized in the Chrome browser running on the client computer using the Electro-magnetic Functional Anatomy Viewer (EMFAV). A functional overview and high-level communication pattern are shown in Figure 1. EMFAV is hosted on
5
FLOW's web server, from which the client computer can make requests when opening an MFF file using Sourcerer.
Image /page/5/Figure/3 description: The image shows a diagram of a system with three main components: EMFAV, FLOW, and EMIM API. EMFAV, located on the Client Computer, handles display methods such as Scalp, Cortical, Dipoles, Flat Map, and Butterfly Plot. FLOW, situated on the Server, manages User Authentication, MFF Files, Experiments, and Atlas Head Models, while EMIM API, also on the Server, provides Inverse Algorithms like sLORETA, LORETA, MSP, and Spectral, illustrating the data flow and interactions between these components.
Figure 1. Architecture Overview of Sourcerer. Sourcerer is divided into three software components shown in green: EMFAV, EMIM API, and Atlas Head Models.
5. INDICATIONS FOR USE
The software is intended for use by a trained/qualified EEG technologist or physician on both adult and pediatric subjects at least 16 years of age for the visualization of human brain function by fusing a variety of EEG information with rendered images of an idealized head model and an idealized MRI image.
6. COMPARISON OF TECHNOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS WITH PREDICATE DEVICE
| New Device | Primary Predicate Device | |
|---|---|---|
| Device name | Sourcerer | GeoSource |
| 510(k) number | K092844 | |
| Manufacturer | Brain Electrophysiology | |
| Laboratory Company LLC | EGI | |
| Regulation | 882.1400 | 882.1400 |
| Product Code | OLX | OLX |
| Device | ||
| Classification | ||
| Name | Class II | Class II |
| Software only | ||
| product | Yes | Yes |
6
| Computer OS | MS-windows 7, Mac OS, Linux. Is
cloud based and relies on web
browser for user interface. | Mac OS |
|-------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| MRI visualization | Idealized MRI (average) | Idealized MRI (average) |
| Source estimation
methods: | | sLORETA,LORETA,LAURA |
| Linear inverse
methods | | |
| Forward head
modeling | Finite Element Method
(FEM).
Tissues and respective
conductivities (S/m)
include:
air = 0.0
CSF = 1.6
eyes = 1.55
skull = 0.006
scalp = 0.3,
gray matter = 0.45
white matter = 0.2 | Sphere, Finite Difference
Model (FDM). Tissues
and respective
conductivities (S/m)
include:
air = 0.0
CSF = 1.79
eyes = 1.55
skull = 0.01
scalp = 0.33
gray matter = 0.25
white matter = 0.35 |
Table 1: Comparison of the new device to the predicate device
| Summary of
Technological
Characteristics | Inputs: Sourcerer takes as inputs hdEEG data.
Electrical Head Models: Sourcerer uses idealized (i.e., atlas) head
models to describe current flow from cortex to scalp, where the EEG
is recorded.
Conductivity values: Sourcerer use different conductivity values for
each of the different head tissues.
Forward model: Sourcerer uses the Finite Element Method (FEM) to
derive forward model.
Inverse Methods: Sourcerer uses the LORETA, sLORETA and Multiple
Sparse Priors (MSP) inverse methods.
Display: Sourcerer displays the results on idealized head models |
|------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Substantial
Equivalence
Comparison | The identified equivalent device is GeoSource K092844. GeoSource is
equivalent and different to Sourcerer in the following ways:
● Like GeoSource, Sourcerer takes as inputs hdEEG data.
● Electrical Head Models: Like Sourcerer, GeoSource uses
idealized (i.e., atlas) head models to describe current flow
from cortex to scalp, where the EEG is recorded. Atlas head
models for both Sourcerer and Geosource characterize the |
7
same brain tissues: scalp, skull, eyeballs, air, cerebral spinal fluid, gray matter and white matter.
- Sourcerer and GeoSource use different conductivity values for each of the different head tissues (detailed below).
- Another difference between Sourcerer and GeoSource atlas head models is the way in which the forward model (i.e., how current flow is modeled) is computed. Sourcerer uses the Finite Element Method (FEM) whereas GeoSource uses the Finite Difference Method (FDM) and spherical model (which is not relevant for the present evaluation).
- Inverse Methods: Like Sourcerer, GeoSource uses the LORETA and sLORETA inverse methods. However, Sourcerer includes an additional inverse method (Multiple Sparse Priors—MSP) not supported by GeoSource.
- Display: Like Sourcerer, GeoSource displays the results on idealized head models.
7. PERFORMANCE DATA
Algorithmic testing of HexaFEM and Inverse methods
HexaFEM
HexaFEM is the computational modeling method used to compute current flow from a position on the cortex through the various head tissues in the Sourcerer device.
Comparison of a three-layer sphere between HexaFEM and Spherical Analytics showed that the HexaFEM solutions are consistent with the analytical solutions for the three-layer spherical model.
HexaFEM and FDM Results
Similar to the three-layer sphere analytics, we compared the HexaFEM and FDM solutions for one realistic head model using the same conductivity values. Results showed that the HexaFEM and the FDM solutions are the same.
Inverse Model (EMIM Module)
The inverse solvers were tested using test files with known signal sources. The known signals are from the forward projection, using an atlas head model, of current from each dipole to the scalp. The scalp data from the forward projections signals, with no noise added per standard procedure from scientific literature, were then used to recover the source generator (known) with the various inverse solvers.
8
| Results are quantified as localization error distance (i.e., distance of the source estimate from the original source generating the scalp signal). | |
|---|---|
| LORETA: The average localization error is about 7 mm. The localization error distance is similar to what is reported for LORETA from the creator of LORETA. | |
| sLORETA Source estimation results are exact for the simulated signal sources. This fully replicates the simulated results reported by the creator of sLORETA. | |
| MSP The results show 100% (zero localization error), as expected. | |
| Clinical | |
| Performance | |
| Testing | The clinical data used in the evaluation is obtained from epileptic patients during standard presurgical evaluation. The data from the clinical assessment used in the current clinical evaluation are hdEEG (256 channels) data, resected region (from MRI) and clinical outcome. The hdEEG data allow for Electrical Source Imaging (ESI) to be performed, the resected region provides an anatomic location to compare the ESI results, and the clinical outcome provides assurance that the resected location can be trusted as a ground-truth location. |
| ESI was performed on an average inter-ictal spike derived from each patient's pre-operative hdEEG recording in both Sourcerer and Geosource. For each patient, the Euclidian distance between the location of maximal amplitude and the nearest voxel of the resected boundary was calculated for both devices. | |
| Performance of Sourcerer was shown to be equivalent to GeoSource. | |
| Software | |
| Verification and | |
| Validation Testing | Validation testing involved algorithm testing which validated the accuracy of Sourcerer. The product was deemed fit for clinical use. Sourcerer was designed and developed as recommended by FDA's Guidance, "Guidance for the Content of Premarket Submissions for Software Contained in Medical Device". According to AAMI/ANSI/IEC 62304 Standard, Sourcerer safety classification has been set to Class B. "Basic Documentation Level" applied to this device. |
8. CONCLUSION
The information discussed above and provided in the 510(k) submission demonstrate that the Sourcerer device is substantially equivalent to the predicate.