Hemochron Signature Elite

{0} FDA U.S. FOOD & DRUG ADMINISTRATION # SPECIAL 510(k) SUBSTANTIAL EQUIVALENCE DETERMINATION DECISION SUMMARY ## I Background Information: A 510(k) Number K193041 B Applicant Accriva Diagnostics, Inc. C Proprietary and Established Names Hemochron Signature Elite D Regulatory Information | Product Code(s) | Classification | Regulation Section | Panel | | --- | --- | --- | --- | | JPA | Class II | 21 CFR 864.5425 - Multipurpose System For In Vitro Coagulation Studies | HE - Hematology | ## II Review Summary: This 510(k) submission contains information/data on modifications made to the submitter's own Class II device requiring 510(k). The following items are present and acceptable. 1. The name and 510(k) number of the SUBMITTER'S previously cleared device (Hemochron Signature Elite). 2. Submitter's statement that the INDICATIONS FOR USE/INTENDED USE of the modified device as described in its labeling HAS NOT CHANGED along with the proposed labeling which includes instructions for use, package labeling. 3. A description of the device MODIFICATION(S), including clearly labeled diagrams, engineering drawings, photographs, user's and/or service manuals in sufficient detail to demonstrate that the FUNDAMENTAL SCIENTIFIC TECHNOLOGY of the modified device has not changed. Food and Drug Administration 10903 New Hampshire Avenue Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002 www.fda.gov {1} This change was for a device software modification from version 2.3 to version 2.4 to allow the instrument's heater control loop to have tighter control over the temperature within the cuvette test channel to ensure both the heater plate and the cuvette test channel maintain appropriate temperature (37±1°C) for the duration of the test phase of the assay. 4. Comparison Information (i.e., similarities and differences) to the submitter's legally marketed predicate device including, labeling, intended use, and physical characteristics. 5. A Design Control Activities Summary which includes: a) Identification of Risk Analysis method(s) used to assess the impact of the modification on the device and its components, and the results of the analysis. b) Based on the Risk Analysis, an identification of the verification and/or validation activities required, including methods or tests used and acceptance criteria to be applied. The labeling for this modified subject device has been reviewed to verify that the indication/intended use for the device is unaffected by the modification. In addition, the submitter's description of the particular modification(s) and the comparative information between the modified and unmodified devices demonstrate that the fundamental scientific technology has not changed. The submitter has provided the design control information as specified in The New 510(k) Paradigm and on this basis, I recommend the device be determined substantially equivalent to the previously cleared device. K193041 - Page 2 of 2