Search Results

EzLymph and EzLymph M are intended to treat lymphedema.

EzLymph and EzLymph M is a pump system intended to apply intermittent pneumatic compression (IPC) to arms and legs to relieve the discomfort of lymphedema. The device helps move the flow of lymphatic and venous fluid throughout the extremities by stimulating muscles within the affected extremity. This action mimics natural muscle contractions, improves circulation, and moves excess fluid back to the circulatory system so edema can be eliminated from the body. System components include (a) a mains-powered, portable pneumatic pump with a pressure-control knob and on/off switch (the device contains no control panel or microprocessor circuit); (b) connecting air hoses; and (c) compression garments attached to patient limbs. In addition, garment inserts allow increase in circumference of arm and leg garments. The pump intermittently releases compressed air through the tubing into inflating and deflating bladders within cuffs that are wrapped separately around the patient's upper and lower limbs (full arm, full leg, and half leg).

The provided document is a 510(k) summary for the EzLymph and EzLymph M devices, which are compressible limb sleeves. It focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence to a predicate device (Hydroven 3 Pump) rather than presenting a standalone study with acceptance criteria for the device's performance in a diagnostic context (e.g., AI/ML performance).

Therefore, I cannot extract acceptance criteria and a study proving device performance in the manner requested, as this type of information is not present in the document. The document describes non-clinical testing for safety and mechanical performance, but not a study to evaluate diagnostic or clinical efficacy against specific performance metrics for, for example, an AI/ML algorithm.

Here's an explanation of why the requested information cannot be found and what
is present:

What the document does provide:

• Device Description and Intended Use: The EzLymph and EzLymph M are pump systems intended to apply intermittent pneumatic compression to arms and legs to relieve the discomfort of lymphedema.
• Substantial Equivalence: The primary purpose of this 510(k) summary is to demonstrate that the EzLymph and EzLymph M are substantially equivalent to a legally marketed predicate device (ArjoHuntleigh AB's Hydroven 3 Pump, K910188). This is a regulatory pathway that primarily compares the newer device's technological characteristics and performance to an existing device, rather than requiring extensive de novo clinical efficacy studies.
• Non-Clinical Testing: The document lists several non-clinical tests that the device passed, all referencing FDA-recognized standards:
  • Electrical Safety (IEC 60601-1:2005)
  • EMC (IEC 60601-1-2:2014)
  • Usability Engineering (IEC 62366-1:2015)
  • Risk Management (ISO 14971:2007)
  • Home Healthcare (IEC 60601-1-11:2015)
  • Pump functionality testing
  • Garments pressure cyclic testing
• Comparison Table: A detailed comparison between the EzLymph/EzLymph M and the predicate device (Hydroven 3 Pump) is provided across various characteristics, including intended use, system design, compression methods, physical characteristics (dimensions, weight, pressure range), and materials. This comparison aims to show that any differences do not raise new questions of safety or effectiveness.

Why the requested information (especially points 1-9) is not present:

The questions you've asked (acceptance criteria, sample size, expert ground truth, MRMC studies, standalone performance, training sets for an AI/ML model) are typical for the evaluation of diagnostic AI/ML devices. This document pertains to a physical medical device that provides mechanical compression.

• No AI/ML component is mentioned or evaluated.
• The performance metrics are related to safety, electrical compatibility, and mechanical function (e.g., pressure range, cycle times), not diagnostic accuracy or human reader improvement with AI.
• There's no concept of "ground truth" as it would apply to an AI model (e.g., pathology confirmed diagnoses, expert consensus on imaging findings). The "ground truth" for this device's performance would be whether it safely and reliably delivers the specified pneumatic compression according to its design.

In summary, based only on the provided text, I cannot answer points 1-9 because the document describes a physical medical device (a lymphedema pump), not a diagnostic AI/ML system.

Ask a specific question about this device

To apply intermittent pneumatic compression to the lower limbs to help prevent deep vein thrombosis.

EzVena IPC and EzVena SQS ("EzVena") is a deep vein thrombosis (DVT) pump system intended for performing non-invasive, intermittent compression of the lower limbs. The system is used to squeeze blood from the deep veins, which displaces proximally. On deflation of the cuff, the veins refill, and the intermittent nature of the system ensures periodic flow of blood through the deep veins, helping to prevent venous stasis and the formation of blood clots. System components include a mains-powered, pneumatic pump with touch-input control panel and microprocessor circuit; connecting air hoses; and foot, calf, and calf/thigh garments, or cuffs. The pump intermittently releases compressed air through the tubing into inflating and deflating bladders within cuffs that are wrapped separately around the patient's left and right lower limbs. Compression is uniform in the IPC model and graded sequential in the SQS model. The system alternates between left and right cuffs in EzVena IPC and inflates both garments simultaneously in EzVena SQS.

I am sorry, but the provided text does not contain information about the acceptance criteria or a study proving that a device meets such criteria. The document is an FDA 510(k) premarket notification letter and a summary of the device (EzVena IPC, EzVena SQS) and its comparison to a predicate device (Flowtron ACS900) for establishing substantial equivalence.

This document focuses on:

• Device Description and Intended Use: Explaining what the device is and what it's used for (intermittent pneumatic compression to prevent DVT).
• Comparison to Predicate Device: Highlighting similarities and minor differences between the EzVena devices and the legally marketed Flowtron ACS900.
• Non-Clinical Testing: Listing various tests (biocompatibility, electrical safety, EMC, software validation, etc.) conducted according to recognized standards to demonstrate safety and effectiveness for substantial equivalence. No clinical testing was deemed necessary.
• Cybersecurity and Other Compliance: Addressing compliance with relevant FDA guidance.
• Conclusion of Substantial Equivalence: Stating that the EzVena devices are substantially equivalent to the predicate.

There is no mention of a defined set of acceptance criteria (e.g., performance thresholds for sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, or specific measurements) that the device must meet, nor is there a description of a study designed to demonstrate that the device achieved these specific performance acceptance criteria. The "testing" mentioned refers to non-clinical engineering and bench tests, primarily to ensure safety, electromagnetic compatibility, and proper software function, rather than clinical performance against specific metrics.

Therefore, I cannot provide the requested table, sample sizes, expert qualifications, or details about MRMC studies, standalone performance, or ground truth establishment based on the provided text.

Ask a specific question about this device