Search Results

Catecholamine test system is a device intended to determine whether a group of similar compounds epinephrine and norepinephrine are present in plasma. Catecholamine determinations are used in the diagnosis and treatment of adrenal medulla and hypertensive disorders, and for catecholamine secreting tumors (pheochromo-cytoma, neuroblastoma, ganglioneuroma, and retinoblastoma.

The BAS Plasma Catecholamine Kit employs liquid chromatography with electrochemical detection to separate and quantitate epinephrine (E) and norepinephrine (NE) in human plasma under isocratic conditions as defined in the package insert. BAS provides the mobile phase for the elution of these analytes from the liquid chromatography column, which is also provided, as well as critical reagents for sample preparation. There is one complete start-up kit as well as one accessory replacement kit which will be offered for sale. The accessory replacement kit contains replacement reagents and mobile phase for sample preparation and analysis. The kit is designed for invitro applications only. All reagents and kit supplies contain the appropriate warnings as to irritants, corrosiveness or toxicity, etc. The Plasma Catecholamine Kit is not used in any way to sustain human life or to prevent impairment of human health. Therefore, the kit poses no safety hazard to the patients.

Here's an analysis of the provided text regarding the BAS Plasma Catecholamine Kit, structured to answer your questions about acceptance criteria and the supporting study:

Acceptance Criteria and Device Performance Study

The primary study presented aims to demonstrate substantial equivalence of the BAS Plasma Cateamine Kit to a predicate device (Bio-Rad Plasma Catecholamine Kit by HPLC). While explicit "acceptance criteria" in the form of pre-defined thresholds for performance metrics are not clearly stated as such, the study's goal is to show a high correlation and consistency with the predicate device. The correlation coefficient (R value) appears to be a key metric used for this purpose.

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

Note: The "Acceptance Criteria (Implied)" are inferred from the context of substantial equivalence demonstrations, where high correlation and close agreement with a legally marketed device are typically required. The document does not explicitly state numerical thresholds as "acceptance criteria."

2. Sample Size and Data Provenance

• Sample Size for Test Set: 70 samples were used for both Epinephrine and Norepinephrine analysis.
• Data Provenance: The document does not explicitly state the country of origin or whether the data was retrospective or prospective. It refers to human plasma samples, but no further details about their collection or demographic information are provided.

3. Number of Experts and their Qualifications for Ground Truth

• This study does not involve human expert interpretation to establish ground truth in the traditional sense of image analysis or diagnostic assessment. The "ground truth" here is effectively the measurement obtained by the predicate device (Bio-Rad Plasma Catecholamine Kit by HPLC).
• Therefore, information about the number or qualifications of experts for ground truth establishment is not applicable to this type of chemical assay comparison.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set

• As the "ground truth" is established by the predicate device's measurements, there is no adjudication method involved in the human expert sense. The comparison is directly between the new device's measurements and the predicate device's measurements.

5. Multi-Reader Multi-Case (MRMC) Comparative Effectiveness Study

• No MRMC comparative effectiveness study was done. This study is a direct comparison of analytical performance between two in-vitro diagnostic devices, not an assessment of human reader performance or the impact of AI assistance.

6. Standalone Performance Study

• Yes, a standalone performance study was done in the sense that the BAS Plasma Catecholamine Kit's measurements were observed independently. However, its "performance" is implicitly defined by its correlation and agreement with the predicate device, rather than against an absolute, independent gold standard that is distinct from comparison reference. The table provided directly compares the BAS method against the predicate device (CAD) on the same samples.

7. Type of Ground Truth Used

• The "ground truth" in this study is the measurements obtained from the predicate device (Bio-Rad Plasma Catecholamine Kit by HPLC). This is a common approach for demonstrating substantial equivalence for in-vitro diagnostic devices, where an already approved method serves as the reference.

8. Sample Size for the Training Set

• The document does not explicitly mention a "training set" or "training data" in the context of device development. This is typical for a chemical assay kit comparison, where the device itself is a collection of reagents and a method, rather than a machine learning algorithm that requires training. The 70 samples appear to be for validation/comparison, not for training.

9. How Ground Truth for Training Set was Established

• As no training set is described, this question is not applicable.

Ask a specific question about this device