Search Results

BD Nexiva™ Closed IV Catheter System - Single Port

BD Nexiva™ Closed IV Catheter System is intended to be inserted into a patient's peripheral vascular system for short term use to sample blood, monitor blood pressure, or administer fluids. These devices may be used for any patient population with consideration given to adequacy of vascular anatomy, procedure being performed, fluids being infused, and duration of therapy. The 22-18 GA (0.9-1.3 mm) devices are suitable for use with power injectors set to a maximum pressure of 300 psi (2068 kPa) when access ports not suitable for use with power injectors are removed.

BD Nexiva™ Closed IV Catheter System - Dual Port

BD Nexiva™ Closed IV Catheter System is intended to be inserted into a patient's peripheral vascular system for short term use to sample blood or administer fluids. These devices may be used for any patient population with consideration given to adequacy of vascular anatomy, procedure being performed, fluids being infused, and duration of therapy. The 22-18 GA (0.9-1.3 mm) devices are suitable for use with power injectors set to a maximum pressure of 300 psi (2068 kPa) when access ports not suitable for use with power injectors are removed.

BD Nexiva™ Closed IV Catheter Systems are over-the-needle, intravascular catheters. These devices have a radiopaque BD Vialon™ catheter, needle, needle shield, septum, stabilization platform, integrated extension tubing, clamp, Luer adapter (single or dual port), vent plug, and pre-attached needle-free connector (BD Q-Syte™ or BD MaxZero™) (dual port configurations only). The needle and catheter are protected by a needle cover. A BD Q-Syte™ Needle-free Connector, BD MaxZero™ Needle-free Connector, or end cap with protective cover is provided in the unit package (not available with all configurations).

The closed system is designed to keep blood contained within the device throughout the insertion process. The septum is designed to wipe visible blood from the needle surface as the needle is withdrawn from the catheter, further reducing the risk of blood exposure. The needle tip is passively protected when the needle is removed, reducing the risk of accidental needlestick injury.

These devices have BD Instaflash™ needle technology, allowing for immediate visualization of blood along the catheter. Continuous blood return is seen in the extension tubing. The vent plug prevents blood leakage from the extension tubing during insertion. Both the stabilization platform and Luer connector are color coded to indicate catheter gauge size (24 GA (0.7 mm) = Yellow, 22 GA (0.9 mm) = Blue, 20 GA (1.1 mm) = Pink, 18 GA (1.3 mm) = Green).

The provided 510(k) clearance letter and summary discuss the BD Nexiva™ Closed IV Catheter System, not an AI/ML medical device. Therefore, information regarding acceptance criteria, study details, and ground truth establishment pertinent to AI/ML device performance (sample sizes, expert consensus, MRMC studies, etc.) is not available in the provided text.

The document primarily focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence to a predicate device (K183399) through performance testing of the physical catheter system, rather than validating an algorithm's diagnostic or predictive capabilities.

The performance tests mentioned are:

• Frequency Response Testing
• Kink Resistance Testing
• Blood Fill Time Testing
• ISO 80369-7 Testing
• ISO 11607-1 Testing

However, the specific acceptance criteria and detailed reported performance results for these tests are not explicitly listed in a tabular format, nor are sample sizes, ground truth methodologies, or expert involvement for these physical device performance tests detailed as one might expect for an AI/ML device. The document only states that the device "met all predetermined acceptance criteria for the above-listed performance tests."

Therefore, I cannot fulfill the request to describe the acceptance criteria and the study that proves the device meets the acceptance criteria in the context of an AI/ML device as the input document describes a physical medical device.

Ask a specific question about this device

BD Cathena™ Safety IV Catheter is intended to be inserted into a patient's peripheral vascular system for short term use to sample blood, monitor blood pressure, or administer fluids. This device may be used for any patient population with consideration given to adequacy of vascular anatomy, procedure being performed, fluids being infused, and duration of therapy. This device is suitable for use with power injectors set to a maximum pressure of 325 psi (2240 kPa).

BD Cathena™ Safety IV Catheter is an over-the-needle, intravascular (IV) catheter. This device includes a radiopaque BD Vialon™ catheter, a needle, a grip, a passive safety needle shield, and a flash chamber with removable vent plug. The needle and catheter are protected by a needle cover. BD Cathena™ Safety IV Catheter has BD Instaflash™ Needle Technology, allowing for immediate visualization of blood along the catheter. The flash chamber provides confirmation that the device has entered the vessel. The needle tip is passively protected when the needle is removed, reducing the risk of accidental needlestick injury.

BD Cathena™ Safety IV Catheter is available with or without multi-access BD Multiguard™ Technology, which is designed to stop the flow of blood from the catheter hub until a Luer connection is made. Once a connection is made, fluids or blood can flow through the catheter hub in either direction.

BD Cathena™ Safety IV Catheter is available with or without wings. The catheter hub and wings are color coded to indicate the catheter gauge size (24 GA (0.7 mm) = Yellow, 22 GA (0.9 mm) = Blue, 20 GA (1.1 mm) = Pink, 18 GA (1.3 mm) = Green, 16 GA (1.7 mm) = Grey).

The FDA 510(k) clearance letter for the BD Cathena™ Safety IV Catheter (K251155) indicates that the submission is for manufacturing changes (new colorant supplier, new needle lubricant supplier) and the creation of new performance specifications for existing indications for use (blood sampling and blood pressure monitoring) rather than a novel AI/ML device. Therefore, a traditional acceptance criteria and study proving device meets acceptance criteria related to AI/ML performance, human reader improvement with AI assistance, or standalone algorithm performance, as typically understood in AI/ML medical devices, is not applicable here.

However, based on the provided document, the acceptance criteria and supporting studies are related to demonstrating that the modified device maintains substantial equivalence to its predicate for its stated indications for use, including the new performance specifications.

Here's an interpretation of the relevant information provided:

I. Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

The acceptance criteria are generally understood as the "predetermined design requirements" that the device must meet. The document states that the subject device met all predetermined acceptance criteria for the listed performance tests, demonstrating substantial equivalence to the predicate devices. Specific quantitative acceptance criteria are not explicitly detailed in this summary for each test, but the successful completion of these tests serves as evidence of meeting those criteria.

II. Sample Size and Data Provenance for Test Set

The document does not specify exact sample sizes for each performance test (e.g., number of catheters tested for Blood Fill Time, Kink Resistance, or Frequency Response). However, it implies that sufficient samples were tested to "ensure that the subject device meets pre-determined design requirements."

The "test set" in this context refers to the samples of the subject device used for physical and functional testing. The provenance of these samples would be prospective, as they are newly manufactured devices undergoing verification for the submission. No information is provided regarding the country of origin of this test data, but it would typically be generated at the manufacturer's testing facilities or authorized contract labs.

III. Number of Experts and Qualifications for Ground Truth

This question is not applicable in the context of this 510(k) submission. This is not a study assessing diagnostic or predictive performance requiring expert interpretation for ground truth. The "ground truth" for the performance tests (e.g., Blood Fill Time, Kink Resistance) is established through standardized laboratory measurement methods and engineering specifications, not expert consensus on medical images or clinical outcomes.

IV. Adjudication Method for Test Set

Not applicable. As described above, the tests are objective physical and functional performance assessments, not subjective interpretations requiring adjudication.

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

No. An MRMC study is typically conducted for diagnostic imaging devices or AI tools where human readers are interpreting cases. This submission is for an intravascular catheter, a physical medical device. The "new performance specifications" are related to the physical and functional characteristics of the catheter (e.g., how quickly blood fills, how well it resists kinking for pressure monitoring), not to aiding human interpretation of medical data. Therefore, a study comparing human readers with and without AI assistance is not relevant or reported here.

VI. Standalone (Algorithm Only) Performance

Not applicable. The BD Cathena™ Safety IV Catheter is a physical medical device and is not an AI algorithm. Its performance is assessed through physical and functional bench testing.

VII. Type of Ground Truth Used

The "ground truth" here is based on engineering specifications and standardized test methods. For example:

• Blood Fill Time: Measured against a specific time objective.
• Frequency Response: Measured against a defined physiological frequency range for accurate blood pressure monitoring.
• Kink Resistance: Measured against criteria for maintaining lumen patency under stress.
• Biocompatibility: Assessed against ISO 10993 standards.
• Sterilization: Assessed against ISO 11135 standards.
• Luer Connections: Assessed against ISO 80369-7 standards.

These are objective, quantitative measurements derived from established industry standards and internal design requirements, not from clinical outcomes, pathology, or expert consensus in a diagnostic sense.

VIII. Sample Size for the Training Set

Not applicable. This is not an AI/ML device that requires a training set.

IX. How the Ground Truth for the Training Set Was Established

Not applicable, as there is no training set for this type of device submission.

Ask a specific question about this device

BD Insyte™ Autoguard™ Shielded IV Catheter is intended to be inserted into a patient's peripheral vascular system for short term use to sample blood, monitor blood pressure, or administer fluids. This device may also be used to facilitate the placement of guidewires and other vascular access devices such as catheters without pre-attached hubs. This device may be used for any patient population with consideration given to adequacy of vascular anatomy, procedure being performed, fluids being infused, and duration of therapy. The 22-18 GA (0.9-1.3 mm) devices are suitable for use with power injectors set to a maximum pressure of 300 psi (2068 kPa).

BD Insyte™ Autoguard™ BC Shielded IV Catheter is intended to be inserted into a patient's peripheral vascular system for short term use to sample blood, monitor blood pressure, or administer fluids. This device may be used for any patient population with consideration given to adequacy of vascular anatomy, procedure being performed, fluids being infused, and duration of therapy. The 22-18GA (0.9-1.3 mm) devices are suitable for use with power injectors set to a maximum pressure of 300 psi (2068 kPa).

BD Insyte™ Autoguard™ BC Pro Shielded IV Catheter is intended to be inserted into a patient's peripheral vascular system for short term use to sample blood, monitor blood pressure, or administer fluids. This device may be used for any patient population with consideration given to adequacy of vascular anatomy, procedure being performed, fluids being infused, and duration of therapy. The 22-18 GA (0.9-1.3 mm) devices are suitable for use with power injectors set to a maximum pressure of 300 psi (2068 kPa).

BD Insyte™ Autoguard™ Shielded IV Catheter is an over-the-needle, intravascular (IV) catheter. This device includes a radiopaque BD Vialon™ Catheter Material, a needle, a grip with button, a flash chamber with vent plug, and a barrel. The needle and catheter are protected by a needle cover.

The 24-20 GA (0.7-1.1 mm) devices have BD Instaflash™ Needle Technology, allowing for immediate visualization of blood along the catheter. The flash chamber provides confirmation that the device has entered the vessel.

BD Insyte™ Autoguard™ Shielded IV Catheter incorporates BD Autoguard™ Push-button Shielding Technology which is activated when the button is depressed. A spring mechanism retracts the needle and flash chamber into the barrel, fully encasing the needle and reducing the risk of accidental needlestick injury.

BD Insyte™ Autoguard™ Shielded IV Catheter is available with or without wings. The catheter hub and wings are color coded to indicate catheter gauge size (24 GA (0.7 mm) = Yellow, 22 GA (0.9 mm) = Blue, 20 GA (1.1 mm) = Pink, 18 GA (1.3 mm) = Green, 16 GA (1.7 mm) = Grey, 14 GA (2.1 mm) = Orange).

BD Insyte™ Autoguard™ Shielded IV Catheter facilitates the introduction of guidewires and other vascular access devices. The following labeled gauge sizes correspond to the following inside diameter (ID): 24 GA (0.40 mm ID), 22 GA (0.55 mm ID), 20 GA (0.7 mm ID), 18 GA (0.8 mm ID), 16 GA (1.2 mm ID), and 14 GA (1.6 mm ID).

The 22-18 GA (0.9-1.3 mm) devices are suitable for use with power injectors set to a maximum pressure of 300 psi (2068 kPa).

BD Insyte™ Autoguard™ BC Shielded IV Catheter is an over-the-needle, intravascular (IV) catheter with blood control technology. This device includes a radiopaque BD Vialon™ Catheter Material, a needle, a grip with button, a flash chamber with vent plug, and a barrel. The needle and catheter are protected by a needle cover.

The blood control technology is designed to stop the flow of blood from the catheter hub until the initial Luer connection is made. Once the connection is made, fluids or blood can flow through the catheter hub in either direction.

The 24-18 GA (0.7-1.1 mm) devices have BD Instaflash™ Needle Technology, allowing for immediate visualization of blood along the catheter. The flash chamber provides confirmation that the device has entered the vessel.

BD Insyte™ Autoguard™ BC Shielded IV Catheter incorporate BD Autoguard™ Push-button Shielding Technology which is activated when the button is depressed. A spring mechanism retracts the needle and flash chamber into the barrel, fully encasing the needle and reducing the risk of accidental needlestick injury.

BD Insyte™ Autoguard™ BC Shielded IV Catheter is available with or without wings. The catheter hub and wings are color coded to indicate the catheter gauge size (24 GA (0.7 mm) = Yellow, 22 GA (0.9 mm) = Blue, 20 GA (1.1 mm) = Pink, 18 GA (1.3 mm) = Green, 16 GA (1.7 mm) = Grey).

The 22-18 GA (0.9-1.3 mm) devices are suitable for use with power injectors set to a maximum pressure of 300 psi (2068 kPa).

BD Insyte™ Autoguard™ BC Pro Shielded IV Catheter is an over-the-needle, intravascular (IV) catheter with blood control technology. This device includes a radiopaque BD Vialon™ Catheter Material, a needle, a grip with button, a flash chamber with vent plug, and a barrel. The needle and catheter are protected by a needle cover.

The blood control technology is designed to stop the flow of blood from the catheter hub until the initial Luer connection is made. Once the connection is made, fluids or blood can flow through the catheter hub in either direction.

The 24-18 GA (0.7-1.1 mm) devices have BD Instaflash™ Needle Technology, allowing for immediate visualization of blood along the catheter. The flash chamber provides confirmation that the device has entered the vessel.

BD Insyte™ Autoguard™ BC Pro Shielded IV Catheter incorporate BD Autoguard™ Push-button Shielding Technology which is activated when the button is depressed. A spring mechanism retracts the needle and flash chamber into the barrel, fully encasing the needle and reducing the risk of accidental needlestick injury.

BD Insyte™ Autoguard™ BC Pro Shielded IV Catheter is available with or without wings. The catheter hub and wings are color coded to indicate the catheter gauge size (24 GA (0.7 mm) = Yellow, 22 GA (0.9 mm) = Blue, 20 GA (1.1 mm) = Pink, 18 GA (1.3 mm) = Green, 16 GA (1.7 mm) = Grey).

The 22-18 GA (0.9-1.3 mm) devices are suitable for use with power injectors set to a maximum pressure of 300 psi (2068 kPa).

This document is a 510(k) clearance letter for three IV catheter devices, indicating that they are substantially equivalent to a previously cleared predicate device (K201075). It describes the changes made (new performance specifications and revised IFU) and provides a summary of performance tests conducted.

However, it does not contain the detailed acceptance criteria and reported device performance information that you specifically asked for in a table, nor does it describe a study that "proves the device meets the acceptance criteria" in the format of a clinical trial or algorithm validation study. The document primarily focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence to a predicate device, which often relies on bench testing and comparisons of technological characteristics, rather than extensive clinical studies or AI algorithm performance validation.

Therefore, I cannot provide a table of acceptance criteria and reported device performance from this document because it is not present. Similarly, information regarding sample sizes for test/training sets, data provenance, expert ground truth adjudication for AI, MRMC studies, standalone algorithm performance, or training set ground truth establishment is not applicable or not provided within this 510(k) clearance document, as it pertains to a physical medical device (IV catheter) and not an AI/ML-driven device.

The study described to demonstrate substantial equivalence consists of bench testing to verify new performance specifications and ensuring compliance with relevant ISO and ASTM standards.

Here's an overview of the information that is available in relation to performance:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance:

• Not provided in this document. The document states that "the subject device met all predetermined acceptance criteria for the above-listed performance tests," but it does not specify what those acceptance criteria were (e.g., specific thresholds or ranges for frequency response, kink resistance, or blood fill time). It also does not present the numerical results ("reported device performance") of these tests.

2. Sample size used for the test set and the data provenance:

• Not applicable / Not provided. The document describes bench testing of physical devices, not an AI/ML system or a clinical study with a "test set" of patients or data in the context of AI validation.

3. Number of experts used to establish the ground truth for the test set and the qualifications of those experts:

• Not applicable / Not provided. This information is relevant for AI/ML device validation and is not present for this physical medical device.

4. Adjudication method (e.g. 2+1, 3+1, none) for the test set:

• Not applicable / Not provided. This information is relevant for AI/ML device validation and is not present for this physical medical device.

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:

• No. This is not an AI/ML device, so an MRMC study is not relevant.

6. If a standalone (i.e. algorithm only without human-in-the loop performance) was done:

• No. This is not an AI/ML device.

7. The type of ground truth used (expert consensus, pathology, outcomes data, etc):

• Not applicable / Not provided. For the performance tests listed (Frequency Response, Kink Resistance, Blood Fill Time, Catheter Separation Force), the "ground truth" would be the direct measurements obtained from the physical properties of the devices themselves, compared against pre-defined engineering specifications.

8. The sample size for the training set:

• Not applicable / Not provided. This is not an AI/ML device.

9. How the ground truth for the training set was established:

• Not applicable / Not provided. This is not an AI/ML device.

Summary of Performance Tests and Compliance (as described in the document):

The document states that a risk analysis was conducted to assess the impact of modifications. When technological characteristics were identical to the predicate, results from the predicate were applied. For other aspects, the following tests were conducted:

BD Internal Requirements:

• Frequency Response Testing: To support blood pressure monitoring indications.
• Kink Resistance Testing: To support blood pressure monitoring indications.
• Blood Fill Time Testing: To support blood sampling indications.
• Catheter Separation Force: (No specific indication mentioned, but likely related to structural integrity during withdrawal)

Compliance with Standards Testing:

• Luer Testing: According to ISO 80369-7 (Small-bore connectors for liquids and gases in healthcare applications).
• Packaging Testing: According to ISO 11607-1, ASTM F2096-11 (for gross leaks), and ASTM F88/F88M-15 (for seal strength).
• Biocompatibility: According to ISO 10993-1 (general biological evaluation) and ISO 10993-5 (for in vitro cytotoxicity).

Conclusion: The document explicitly states: "Per the design control requirements specified in 21 CFR §820.30, the subject device met all predetermined acceptance criteria for the above-listed performance tests, demonstrating substantial equivalence to the predicate devices." This indicates that the tests were performed and the results aligned with the internal and regulatory specifications, affirming the device's substantial equivalence.

Ask a specific question about this device

BD Nexiva™ Diffusics™ Closed IV Catheter System is intended to be inserted into a patient's peripheral vascular system for short term use to sample blood, monitor blood pressure or administer fluids. This device may be used for any patient population with consideration given to adequacy of vascular anatomy, procedure being performed, fluids being infused, and duration of therapy. This device is suitable for use with power injectors set to a maximum pressure of 325 psi (2240 kPa) when access ports not suitable for use with power injectors are removed.

BD Nexiva™ Diffusics™ Closed IV Catheter Systems (Nexiva Diffusics) and BD Nexiva™ Diffusics™ Closed IV Catheter System with BD MaxZero™ Needle-free Connector (Nexiva Diffusics with Max Zero) are over-the-needle, intravascular (IV) catheters. These devices have a radiopaque BD Vialon™ Catheter Material with three side holes located near the tip of the catheter which are designed to optimize power injection procedures. These devices also have a needle, needle shield, septum, stabilization platform, integrated extension tubing, clamp, Luer connector, and vent plug. The Luer connector displays gauge-specific maximum flow rate and the maximum power injector pressure limit setting. The needle and catheter are protected by a needle cover. An end cap with protective cover is provided in the unit package.

A BD MaxZero™ device with protective cover is provided in the unit package for BD Nexiva™ Diffusics™ Closed IV Catheter System with BD MaxZero™ Needle-free Connector kit. The closed system is designed to keep blood contained within the device throughout the insertion process. The septum is designed to wipe visible blood from the needle surface as the needle is withdrawn from the catheter, further reducing the risk of blood exposure. The needle tip is passively protected when the needle is removed, reducing the risk of accidental needle stick injury.

These devices have BD Instaflash™ Needle Technology, allowing for immediate visualization of blood along the catheter. Continuous blood return is seen in the extension tubing. The vent plug prevents blood leakage from the extension tubing during insertion. The stabilization platform and Luer connector are color coded to indicate catheter gauge size (24 GA (0.7 mm) = Yellow, 22 GA (0.9 mm) = Blue, 20 GA (1.1 mm) = Pink, 18 GA (1.3 mm) = Green).

The provided FDA 510(k) clearance letter and summary for the BD Nexiva™ Diffusics™ Closed IV Catheter System does not contain information related to software, artificial intelligence, or diagnostic imaging. Therefore, it is impossible to describe acceptance criteria and study details related to a device using AI, ground truth, expert readers, or sample sizes for training/test sets as requested in the prompt.

The document pertains to a physical medical device (an IV catheter system) and its substantial equivalence to predicate devices, focusing on:

• Indications for Use: Changes to include "blood pressure monitoring indication" for one of the devices.
• Physical Characteristics: Materials, dimensions, sterilization, and packaging components.
• Performance Testing: Mechanical and functional tests relevant to IV catheters (frequency response, kink resistance, blood fill time, luer lock performance, packaging integrity).

There is no mention of:

• A device that uses AI.
• Any form of image analysis, signal processing, or diagnostic output that would require a "test set," "ground truth," "expert consensus," "human-in-the-loop performance," or "MRMC comparative effectiveness study."
• Specific acceptance criteria percentages for sensitivity, specificity, or similar metrics typically associated with AI/diagnostic device performance.
• Training or test data sets, data provenance, or the number/qualifications of experts for labeling or adjudication.

The questions in the prompt are designed for a different type of medical device submission, specifically those involving software as a medical device (SaMD) or AI/machine learning components for diagnostic or prognostic purposes.

Therefore, I cannot fulfill the request as the provided text does not contain the necessary information.

Ask a specific question about this device

The PIVO™ Pro Needle-free Blood Collection Device attaches to a peripheral IV catheter system for use to obtain venous blood specimens into a vacuum tube, blood culture bottle, or syringe from adult and pediatric patients, including those with difficult intravenous access who may have small, fragile, and/or non-palpable veins. For blood culture, the device can be used at initial placement of the peripheral IV catheter.

The PIVOTM Pro Needle-free Blood Collection Device is a sterile, single use needle-free collection device that attaches to a peripheral intravascular (IV) catheter system for use to obtain venous blood specimens. The device is comprised of an inner flow tube with a slider, proximal flexible tube with female Luer, outer housing and winged clip on the distal end. The winged clip attaches to the catheter system The female Luer attaches to an evacuated tube holder or syringe. The inner flow tube is then advanced to collect a blood sample. Once complete, the inner flow tube is retracted, and the device is removed from the IV. The device is also suitable for use for blood culture collection at initial placement of peripheral IV catheters. The device is available in three sizes: 20GA, 22GA and 24GA IV compatible. The device is compatible with the corresponding IV gauge and larger IV catheters. The PIVOTM Pro Needle-free Blood Collection Device is compatible with peripheral IV catheters and extension sets with NearPortTM IV Access.

The provided document is a 510(k) Premarket Notification from the FDA for a medical device called the "PIVO™ Pro Needle-free Blood Collection Device." This document details the device's indications for use, technological characteristics, and comparison to a predicate device, along with a summary of performance tests. However, it does not describe an AI/ML powered device or a study involving human experts for ground truth establishment, MRMC studies, or training/test set sample sizes in the context of AI/ML.

The document primarily focuses on establishing substantial equivalence for the device itself (a needle-free blood collection device), specifically for the addition of blood culture collection and an extended shelf life. The performance tests mentioned (e.g., Insertion Test, Blood Leak Test, Package Integrity) are related to the physical and functional aspects of the hardware device, not the performance of an AI/ML algorithm.

Therefore, I cannot extract the requested information about acceptance criteria for an AI/ML powered device, the study proving its performance (in terms of AI metrics), sample sizes for AI test/training sets, expert involvement in ground truth, or MRMC studies, as this information is not present in the provided text.

The text does state:

• "Clinical studies are not required to demonstrate substantial equivalence to the predicate device."
• "Summary of Performance tests completed on the subject devices were limited to those tests required Performance to support a determination of substantial equivalence to the predicate device."
• "Per design control requirements specified in 21 CFR 820.30, the subject device met all predetermined acceptance criteria for the above-listed performance test, demonstrating substantial equivalence to the predicate device."

This indicates that internal performance tests were conducted against pre-determined acceptance criteria, but these are for the physical device's functionality and safety, not for an AI/ML algorithm's diagnostic or predictive performance.

Ask a specific question about this device

The BD Nexiva™ Diffusics™ Closed IV Catheter System is intended to be inserted into a patient's vascular system for short term use to sample blood or administer fluids. These devices may be used for any patient population with consideration given to adequacy of vascular anatomy, procedure being performed, fluids being infused, and duration of therapy. These devices are suitable for use with power injectors set to a maximum pressure of 325 psi (2240 kPa) when access ports not suitable for use with power injectors are removed.

BD Nexiva™ Diffusics™ Closed IV Catheter Systems are over-the-needle, intravascular (IV) catheters. These devices have a radiopaque BD Vialon™ catheter material with three side holes located near the tip of the catheter which are designed to optimize power injection procedures. These devices also have a needle, needle shield, septum, stabilization platform, integrated extension tubing, clamp, Luer connector, and vent plug. The Luer connector displays gauge specific maximum flow rate and the maximum power injector pressure limit setting. The needle and catheter are protected by a needle cover. An end cap with protective cover is provided in the unit package. A BD MaxZero™ device with protective cover is provided in the unit package.

This document is a 510(k) Premarket Notification from the FDA regarding the BD Nexiva™ Diffusics™ Closed IV Catheter System with BD MaxZero™ Needle-free Connector. It determines that the device is substantially equivalent to a legally marketed predicate device.

The request asks for information about the acceptance criteria and the study that proves the device meets the acceptance criteria, specifically related to an AI/Machine Learning device. However, this document does not describe an AI/Machine Learning device or any AI/ML performance studies. It pertains to a physical medical device (an IV catheter system).

Therefore, I cannot provide the requested information for acceptance criteria and study proving device meets criteria in the context of an AI/ML device from this document.

The document primarily focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence of the new catheter system to a previously cleared predicate device (K173354) by comparing technological characteristics and outlining performance tests conducted on the physical device.

Here's what can be extracted, specific to the physical device, but it's important to reiterate that this is NOT about an AI/ML system's performance.

1. A table of acceptance criteria and the reported device performance:

The document broadly states that "the subject device met all predetermined acceptance criteria for the above-listed performance tests, demonstrating substantial equivalence to the predicate device." However, it does not provide specific numerical acceptance criteria or detailed reported performance values for each test. Instead, it lists the types of tests conducted:

2. Sample size used for the test set and the data provenance:

The document states, "When technological characteristics between the subject and predicate devices were found to be identical, results of performance testing conducted on the predicate devices were applied to the subject device." This implies that new testing was primarily conducted for the modified aspects (e.g., the longer length catheter configurations and the addition of the MaxZero™ Needle-free Connector). Specific sample sizes for these tests are not provided in this document. The data provenance would be from manufacturing and testing labs of Becton Dickinson. It's a regulatory submission for a physical device, so the data is likely prospective testing conducted to demonstrate product safety and performance. No country of origin of data is specified beyond "Becton Dickinson Infusion Therapy Systems Inc. Sandy, Utah 84070 USA."

3. Number of experts used to establish the ground truth for the test set and the qualifications of those experts:

This question is not applicable as this is a submission for a physical device, not an AI/ML device relying on expert interpretation for ground truth. The "ground truth" for a physical device would be its measurable physical properties and performance under specific test conditions, established by engineering and quality control procedures, adhering to relevant ISO and ASTM standards.

4. Adjudication method (e.g. 2+1, 3+1, none) for the test set:

Not applicable. Adjudication methods are typically relevant for human interpretation of imaging or other medical data in AI/ML validation studies. For physical device testing, the "adjudication" is compliance with documented, objective test procedures and acceptance criteria.

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. This is not an AI/ML device or an MRMC study.

6. If a standalone (i.e. algorithm only without human-in-the loop performance) was done:

Not applicable. This is not an AI/ML device.

7. The type of ground truth used (expert consensus, pathology, outcomes data, etc):

For this physical device, the "ground truth" is based on:

• Engineering specifications and design requirements: How the device is designed to perform.
• Measurement and testing against recognized standards: Compliance with ISO (e.g., 10993 for biocompatibility, 10555 for catheters, 11607 for packaging) and ASTM standards (e.g., F2096, F88/F88M-15, D4169-16).
• Internal BD requirements: Specific performance parameters defined by the manufacturer (e.g., open flow pressure, power injection peak pressure, catheter stability).

8. The sample size for the training set:

Not applicable. This is a physical device, not an AI/ML model that requires training data.

9. How the ground truth for the training set was established:

Not applicable. This is a physical device, not an AI/ML model.

Ask a specific question about this device

The PIVO™ Pro Needle-free Blood Collection Device attaches to a peripheral IV catheter system for use to obtain venous blood specimens into a vacuum tube or syringe from adult and pediatric patients, including those with difficult intravenous access who may have small, fragile, and/or non-palpable veins.

The PIVO™ Pro Needle-free Blood Collection Device is a sterile, single use needle-free collection device that attaches to a peripheral intravascular catheter (IV) system. The device is comprised of an inner flow tube with a slider, proximal flexible tube with female Luer, outer housing, and winged clip on the distal end. The winged clip attaches to the IV system. The female Luer attaches to an evacuated tube holder or syringe. The inner flow tube is then advanced to collect a blood sample. Once complete, the inner flow tube is retracted, and the device is removed from the IV.

The device is available in three sizes: 20GA, 22GA, and 24GA IV compatible. The device is compatible with the corresponding IV gauge and larger IV catheters. The PIVOTM Pro Needle-free Blood Collection Device is compatible with peripheral IV catheters and extension sets with NearPort™ IV Access.

The provided document is a 510(k) summary for the PIVOTM Pro Needle-free Blood Collection Device, which seeks to demonstrate substantial equivalence to a predicate device (PIVOTM Needle-free Blood Collection Device). This type of submission relies on demonstrating that the new device is as safe and effective as a legally marketed predicate, rather than proving absolute safety and effectiveness from scratch. Therefore, the "acceptance criteria" and "study that proves the device meets the acceptance criteria" are framed within the context of demonstrating substantial equivalence, primarily through non-clinical performance testing and a comparison of technological characteristics.

Here’s a breakdown of the information requested, based on the provided text:

1. A table of acceptance criteria and the reported device performance

The document does not explicitly present a table of acceptance criteria with corresponding performance results. Instead, it lists the performance tests conducted and states that the device "met all predetermined acceptance criteria for the above-listed performance tests, demonstrating substantial equivalence to the predicate devices."

However, we can infer some "acceptance criteria" based on the tests performed:

2. Sample sizes used for the test set and the data provenance

The document does not specify the exact sample sizes (N values) for each individual performance test (e.g., how many devices were tested for catheter perforation, how many for flow rate). It also does not explicitly state the country of origin of the data or whether the studies were retrospective or prospective. Given that these are bench and lab tests for device clearance, they are inherently prospective.

3. Number of experts used to establish the ground truth for the test set and the qualifications of those experts

This information is not applicable in the context of this 510(k) summary. The "ground truth" for this device is based on objective measurements and compliance with recognized standards and internal design requirements, not expert consensus on interpretations like with diagnostic imaging. Usability testing would involve users, but the number and qualifications of those users are not detailed.

4. Adjudication method (e.g. 2+1, 3+1, none) for the test set

This concept is not applicable here as these are performance and engineering tests, not studies requiring human interpretation and adjudication (e.g., clinical trials for diagnostic algorithms).

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

An MRMC study was not conducted. This type of study applies to AI/CADe (Computer-Assisted Detection) or CADx (Computer-Assisted Diagnosis) devices where human readers (e.g., radiologists) use AI assistance to improve their diagnostic performance. The PIVOTM Pro is a physical blood collection device, not an AI software. The submission explicitly states: "Clinical studies are not required to demonstrate substantial equivalence to the predicate device."

6. If a standalone (i.e. algorithm only without human-in-the-loop performance) was done

This concept is not applicable as the device is a physical medical device, not an algorithm or AI system. Its performance is evaluated through physical and functional testing.

7. The type of ground truth used (expert consensus, pathology, outcomes data, etc)

For this device, the "ground truth" relates to meeting engineering specifications, material properties, sterility, and functional performance benchmarks derived from industry standards (e.g., ISO, ASTM), internal design requirements, and prior knowledge from the predicate device. It is primarily based on:

• Physical measurements and criteria: e.g., acceptable flow rates, specified dimensions, absence of leaks, specified pull force.
• Compliance with recognized standards: e.g., ISO 10993-1 for biocompatibility, ISO 11137-1 for sterilization, ASTM D4169 and ISO 11607-1 for packaging.
• Functional tests: verifying proper insertion, alignment, and absence of catheter perforation.

8. The sample size for the training set

This is not applicable. This is a physical device, not an AI/machine learning model, so there is no "training set."

9. How the ground truth for the training set was established

This is not applicable for the same reason as above.

Ask a specific question about this device

The Nexiva™ Closed IV Catheter System with NearPort™ IV Access is intended to be inserted into a patient's peripheral venous system for short term use to administer fluids and/or medications and to sample blood. These devices may be used for any patient population with consideration given to adequacy of vascular anatomy, procedure being performed, fluids being infused, and duration of therapy. The 24-18 GA (0.7-1.3 mm) devices are suitable for use with power injectors set to a maximum pressure of 300 psi (2068 kPa) when connected to the NearPort™ IV Access.

The Nexiva™ Closed IV Catheter System with NearPort™ IV Access is an over-the-needle, intravenous (IV) catheter. These devices have a radiopaque Vialon™ catheter tubing, needle, needle shield, septum, stabilization platform, long extension tubing, clamp, Luer adapter, and vent plug. The needle and catheter tubing are protected by a needle cover. A MaxZero™ needle-free connector with protective cover is provided in the package. The closed system is designed to keep blood contained within the device throughout the insertion process. The septum is designed to wipe visible blood from the needle surface as the needle is withdrawn from the catheter, further reducing the risk of blood exposure. The needle tip is passively protected when the needle is removed, reducing the risk of accidental needlestick injury. These devices have Instaflash™ Needle Technology, allowing for immediate visualization of blood return along the catheter. Continuous blood return is seen in the long extension tubing. The vent plug and the NearPort™ IV Access prevent blood leakage from the long extension tubing during insertion. Both the long extension tubing and NearPort™ IV Access are suitable to administer fluids and/or medications and to sample blood. In addition, the NearPort™ IV Access is compatible with the PIVO™ Pro Needle-free Blood Collection Device for needle-free blood draws and is suitable for use with power injectors set to a maximum pressure of 300 psi (2068 kPa). These devices are available with wings. The catheter hub and wings are color coded to indicate the catheter gauge size (24 GA (0.7 mm) = Yellow, 22 GA (0.9 mm) = Blue, 20 GA (1.1 mm) = Pink, 18 GA (1.3 mm) = Green).

This document (K231239) is a 510(k) Premarket Notification for the BD Nexiva™ Closed IV Catheter System with NearPort™ IV Access. This submission aims to demonstrate substantial equivalence to a predicate device.

The provided text describes the regulatory aspects, technical characteristics, and the summary of performance testing for the device. However, it does not contain information regarding studies that establish a ground truth through expert consensus, MRMC studies, or training set details typically found in AI/ML device submissions. This is because the device in question is an IV catheter system, a physical medical device, not an AI/ML-driven diagnostic or therapeutic system. Therefore, the concepts of "ground truth for the test set," "number of experts," "adjudication method," "effect size of human readers improving with AI," "standalone algorithm performance," and "training set details" are not applicable in this context.

The acceptance criteria here pertain to engineering and biological performance standards for medical devices, rather than accuracy metrics for AI/ML models.

Here's a breakdown of the available information relevant to "acceptance criteria and the study that proves the device meets the acceptance criteria" for this physical medical device:

Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

The device manufacturer conducted various performance tests to ensure the Nexiva™ Closed IV Catheter System with NearPort™ IV Access meets predetermined design requirements and demonstrates substantial equivalence to its predicate device (BD Nexiva™ Closed IV Catheter System, K183399).

The document states that the subject devices met all predetermined acceptance criteria for the listed performance tests, demonstrating substantial equivalence. While specific numerical outcomes of these tests are not provided in this 510(k) summary, the overall statement of meeting acceptance criteria serves as the "reported device performance."

Table of Acceptance Criteria (based on stated tests and standards):

Study Details (as applicable to a physical medical device)

1. Sample sizes used for the test set and the data provenance:

   • The document does not explicitly state specific sample sizes (e.g., number of units tested) for each performance test. It refers to "performance tests completed on the subject devices."
   • Data Provenance: The studies were conducted by Becton Dickinson Infusion Therapy Systems Inc., based in Sandy, Utah, USA. The data is from internal performance verification testing ("BD Internal Studies") and compliance testing to international (ISO, ASTM) and national (FDA guidance) standards. The studies would be considered prospective as they were conducted specifically for this submission to demonstrate compliance.

2. Number of experts used to establish the ground truth for the test set and the qualifications of those experts:

   • Not Applicable. This is a physical medical device (IV catheter), not an AI/ML diagnostic. "Ground truth" in this context refers to engineering specifications and performance standards established by organizations like ISO, ASTM, and FDA. The "experts" involved would be engineers, scientists, and regulatory affairs professionals ensuring the device meets these pre-defined physical and functional requirements.

3. Adjudication method (e.g. 2+1, 3+1, none) for the test set:

   • Not Applicable. Adjudication methods like 2+1 or 3+1 are used in subjective interpretation tasks (e.g., radiology image review) to establish consensus ground truth. For objective physical performance tests (e.g., tensile strength, flow rate), the results are quantitative and do not require expert adjudication in this manner. Compliance is determined by meeting numerical or descriptive criteria within established standards.

4. 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:

   • No, an MRMC study was not done. This type of study is specifically designed for AI-assisted diagnostic devices where human readers interpret medical images. This document is for a physical IV catheter; AI assistance for human readers is not relevant.

5. If a standalone (i.e. algorithm only without human-in-the loop performance) was done:

   • Not Applicable. This is not an AI algorithm. Its performance is tested as a standalone physical device.

6. The type of ground truth used (expert consensus, pathology, outcomes data, etc.):

   • The "ground truth" for this device's performance is established by engineering and quality standards, including:
     • International Standards (ISO 10993, ISO 10555, ISO 23908, ISO 594, ISO 11135, ISO 14971)
     • ASTM Standards (ASTM D4169, ASTM F2182)
     • FDA Guidance Documents (e.g., for Usability, Microbial Ingress, MR Compatibility)
     • Internal design requirements and specifications, which are based on the above standards and common medical device engineering principles.
   • "Ground truth" is not based on expert consensus for subjective interpretation or pathology/outcomes data in the way it would be for a diagnostic tool.

7. The sample size for the training set:

   • Not Applicable. This is not an AI/ML device that requires a training set.

8. How the ground truth for the training set was established:

   • Not Applicable. As there is no training set for a non-AI/ML device, ground truth establishment for it is irrelevant.

Ask a specific question about this device

BD Cathena™ Safety IV Catheters are intended to be inserted into a patient's peripheral vascular system for short term use to sample blood, monitor blood pressure, or administer fluids. These devices may be used for any patient population with consideration given to adequacy of vascular anatomy, procedure being performed, fluids being infused, and duration of therapy. These devices are suitable for use with power injectors set to a maximum pressure of 325 psi (2240 kPa).

BD Cathena™ Safety IV Catheters are over-the-needle, intravascular (IV) catheters include a radiopaque BD Vialon™ catheter, needle, grip, passive safety needle shield, and flash chamber with removable vent plug. The needle and catheter are protected by a needle cover. These devices have BD Instaflash™ Needle Technology, allowing for immediate visualization of blood along the catheter. The flash chamber provides confirmation that the vessel. The needle tip is passively protected when the needle is removed, reducing the risk of accidental needlestick injury.

These devices are available with or without multi-access BD Multiguard™ Technology, which is designed to stop the flow of blood from the catheter hub until a Luer connection is made. Once a connection is made, fluids or blood can flow through the cather direction.

These devices are available with or without wings are color coded to indicate the catheter gauge size (24 GA (0.7 mm) = Yellow, 22 GA (0.9 mm) = Blue, 20 GA (1.3 mm) = Green, 16 GA (1.7 mm) = Green, 16 GA (1.7 mm) = Grey). These devices are not made with natural rubber latex.

The provided document is a 510(k) summary for the BD Cathena Safety IV Catheter. It does not describe a study involving an AI/Machine Learning device or its acceptance criteria. Instead, it describes a medical device (an IV catheter) and outlines its substantial equivalence to a predicate device based on technological characteristics and performance testing.

Therefore, I cannot extract the requested information regarding acceptance criteria and studies for an AI device from this document. The document primarily focuses on regulatory approval for the BD Cathena Safety IV Catheter, which is a physical medical device, not an AI/ML product.

Ask a specific question about this device

BD Cathena™ Safety IV Catheters are intended to be inserted into a patient's peripheral vascular system for short term use to sample blood, monitor blood pressure, or administer fluids. These devices may be used for any patient population with consideration given to adequacy of vascular anatomy, procedure being performed, fluids being infused, and duration of therapy. These devices are suitable for use with power injectors set to a maximum pressure of 325 psi (2240 kPa).

BD Cathena™ Safety IV Catheters are over-the-needle, intravascular (IV) catheters. These devices include a radiopaque BD Vialon™ catheter, needle, grip, passive safety needle shield, and flash chamber with removable vent plug. The needle and catheter are protected by a needle cover. These devices have BD Instaflash™ Needle Technology, allowing for immediate visualization of blood along the catheter. The flash chamber provides confirmation that the device has entered the vessel. The needle tip is passively protected when the needle is removed, reducing the risk of accidental needlestick injury.

These devices are available with or without multi-access BD Multiguard™ Technology, which is designed to stop the flow of blood from the catheter hub until a Luer connection is made. Once a connection is made, fluids or blood can flow through the catheter hub in either direction.

These devices are available with or without wings. The catheter hub and wings are color coded to indicate the catheter gauge size (24 GA (0.7 mm) = Yellow, 22 GA (0.9 mm) = Blue, 20 GA (1.1 mm) = Pink, 18 GA (1.3 mm) = Green, 16 GA (1.7 mm) = Grey). These devices are not made with natural rubber latex.

The provided document is a 510(k) premarket notification for the BD Cathena™ Safety IV Catheter. It outlines the device's characteristics, indications for use, and a comparison to a predicate device. However, it does not contain the detailed information required to specifically answer questions about acceptance criteria and comprehensive study details like sample sizes for test/training sets, data provenance, expert qualifications, or adjudication methods for AI/human performance studies.

The document focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence to a predicate device (K192443) for minor modifications, primarily the introduction of 16 GA configurations and updates to specifications and instructions for use. It primarily relies on leveraging data from the predicate device and internal BD studies for specific performance tests.

Here's what can be extracted and what information is missing:

1. A table of acceptance criteria and the reported device performance

The document states: "Per design control requirements specified in 21 CFR 820.30, the subject devices met all predetermined acceptance criteria for the above-listed performance tests, demonstrating substantial equivalence to the predicate devices."

However, the specific "predetermined acceptance criteria" and the "reported device performance" are not explicitly listed in a table format in the provided text. The tests performed are:

2. Sample size used for the test set and the data provenance (e.g. country of origin of the data, retrospective or prospective)

This information is not provided in the document. The document mentions "BD Internal Studies" for some tests, but details about sample size or data provenance (retrospective/prospective, country of origin) are absent.

3. Number of experts used to establish the ground truth for the test set and the qualifications of those experts (e.g. radiologist with 10 years of experience)

This information is not applicable and not provided. This device is a physical medical device (intravascular catheter), not an AI-powered diagnostic or decision support system that typically requires expert-established ground truth for its performance evaluation (e.g., in reading medical images). The testing involves physical properties and performance characteristics of the catheter.

4. Adjudication method (e.g. 2+1, 3+1, none) for the test set

This information is not applicable and not provided. As mentioned above, this type of testing is not relevant for the evaluation of a physical medical device.

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

This information is not applicable and not provided. This device is a physical invasive medical device, not an AI system. Therefore, an MRMC study comparing human readers with and without AI assistance is not relevant to its evaluation.

6. If a standalone (i.e. algorithm only without human-in-the-loop performance) was done

This information is not applicable and not provided. This device is a physical catheter, not an algorithm.

7. The type of ground truth used (expert consensus, pathology, outcomes data, etc)

For the performance tests conducted, the "ground truth" would be defined by engineering specifications, industry standards (e.g., ISO), and known physical properties of materials. For example, the "ground truth" for "force to break adhesion" would be a specific measurable force value derived from engineering design and safety requirements. Biocompatibility relies on well-established testing protocols and standards.

8. The sample size for the training set

This information is not applicable and not provided. This device is a physical product, not an AI system that requires a "training set" in the machine learning sense. The term "training set" is not relevant here.

9. How the ground truth for the training set was established

This information is not applicable and not provided. As stated above, the concept of a "training set" and its "ground truth" is not relevant to the evaluation of this physical medical device.

Ask a specific question about this device