Search Results

Ask a specific question about this device

The EchoFlow BVM-1 is an ultrasonic Doppler system that can be used to measure blood flow velocities. It can be used either for measurement of vessels below the skin, or for intraoperative measurements. It is not intended for cardiac or fetal use. A 10 MHz probe is supplied. The unit maintains its specified accuracy even if the angle between the probe face and vessel axis is as much as ±15°, unlike conventional Doppler systems where the angle between the flow direction and the probe must be accurately known. The unit can detect large blood vessels at depths up to 12 mm and small blood vessels at depths up to 10 mm in normal tissue. The system will not detect any signals from vessels more than 15.5 mm from the probe.

The EchoFlow velocity system is a computer-based ultrasonic Doppler blood velocity measuring system used to measure blood velocity in vessels beneath the skin. It can either be used for measurement on the surface of the skin, or for intraoperative measurements. A 10 MHz CW probe is used. When used intraoperatively, a sterile sheath covers the probe and 6 feet of cable coming from the probe. A unique feature of the system is that the angle between the probe and the axis of the blood vessel does not have to be known. An accuracy of 15% is maintained if this angle changes by as much as ±15°. This is done by using a unique probe that emits two beams at known angles with respect to each other, as explained in a later section. Thus, the system is well-adapted to measuring flow in blood vessels beneath the surface of the skin, where the exact angle of the axis of the blood vessel cannot be determined. The unit can detect large blood vessels at depths up to 12 mm and small blood vessels at depths up to 10 mm in normal tissue. It will not detect any signals at depths greater than 15.5 mm from the probe tip.

Here's an analysis of the acceptance criteria and study information for the EchoFlow Doppler Blood Velocity Meter BVM-1, based on the provided text:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance:

The document doesn't explicitly list "acceptance criteria" in a formal, enumerated way with pass/fail thresholds. Instead, it describes performance characteristics the device is designed to achieve, which implicitly serve as the criteria for its intended functions. The reported device performance is presented as meeting these characteristics.

2. Sample Size Used for the Test Set and Data Provenance:

• Test Set Sample Size: The document states that a "Clinical test" was performed for "Clinical validation of the operation of the system in animals and a human." However, specific sample sizes (number of animals, number of human subjects, number of measurements) for this test set are not provided.
• Data Provenance: The document does not specify the country of origin for the data. The clinical test involved both "animals and a human," implying a combination of controlled laboratory/animal studies and a limited human study, though details are scarce. It is a prospective study, as it was conducted to validate the device's operation.

3. Number of Experts Used to Establish the Ground Truth for the Test Set and Qualifications of those Experts:

• The document does not provide any information regarding the number of experts used, nor their qualifications, for establishing ground truth in the clinical test.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set:

• The document does not specify any adjudication method.

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

• No MRMC comparative effectiveness study was done. The submission focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence to predicate devices through technical and clinical performance, not on comparing reader performance with and without AI assistance. The device is a measurement tool, not an interpretation tool that would involve human reader interpretation of images.

6. Standalone Performance Study:

• Yes, a standalone performance assessment was conducted. The "Performance data" section (Page 2) details both "Non-clinical tests" and a "Clinical test." The non-clinical tests (Electrical Safety, Doppler accuracy, Software validation, Depth penetration, Ultrasonic emissions tests) are prime examples of a standalone evaluation of the algorithm/device's technical performance characteristics. The clinical test in animals and a human further validates the device's standalone operation in a biological context.

7. Type of Ground Truth Used:

• For the non-clinical tests (e.g., Doppler accuracy, depth penetration), the ground truth would likely have been established using controlled physical phantoms, calibrated instruments, and known physical parameters (e.g., known flow velocities, known depths).
• For the clinical test in animals and a human, the document doesn't explicitly state the ground truth. However, it can be inferred that the ground truth for "blood flow velocities" would likely come from established, independent, and accurate reference methods for measuring blood velocity (e.g., direct venipuncture with flow measurements, other established Doppler systems with known accuracy, or perhaps even direct observation/measurement in animal models if surgically accessible).

8. Sample Size for the Training Set:

• The document does not provide any information about a separate "training set" or its sample size. This is a medical device, not an AI/machine learning algorithm that typically undergoes a distinct training phase with a dedicated dataset. The "development" or "design" of the device (including its unique diffractive transducer and velocity measurement algorithms) would have involved engineering and calibration efforts, but these are not referred to as statistical "training sets" in this context.

9. How the Ground Truth for the Training Set Was Established:

• As a dedicated "training set" is not mentioned, information on how its ground truth was established is not provided. The device likely underwent extensive engineering design, simulations, and experimental validation against known physical principles and calibrated setups, rather than machine learning-style training with a distinct ground truth dataset.

Ask a specific question about this device