Search Results

The CuffGuard is an endotracheal tube cuff controller designed to continuously monitor and maintain user-defined endotracheal tube cuff pressure for patients (adults and pediatrics) who require mechanical ventilation and who are intubated with endotracheal tube including cuff in the ICU, OR and for intra-hospital transport.

The CuffGuard is an endotracheal tube cuff controller designed to continuously monitor and maintain user-defined endotracheal tube cuff pressure for patients (adults and pediatrics) who require mechanical ventilation and who are intubated with endotracheal tube including cuff in the ICU, OR and for intra-hospital transport.

It is used by health professionals (doctor or nurse) specifically trained in this tool.

The CuffGuard has a pressure sensor and software that can monitor and automatically adjust the cuff pressure.

The accessories associated include:

• Connection tube with filter
• Power supply
• Micro USB connection cable
• Fixation clamp and its tilt block)

The FDA 510(k) clearance letter for CuffGuard specifies the device's technical characteristics and performance data to support its substantial equivalence to a predicate device. However, it does not include a detailed study proving the device meets specific acceptance criteria in a clinical context with human readers or standalone performance metrics. The provided document focuses on bench testing and software validation.

Here's an analysis based on the provided text, addressing the requested information to the extent possible:

Description of Acceptance Criteria and Device Performance

The acceptance criteria are implicitly defined by the comparison to the predicate device, the Hamilton Medical Intellicuff, and compliance with relevant electrical safety and software standards. The "reported device performance" is largely presented as a comparison to the predicate's specifications and confirmation of standard compliance.

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

Study Proving Acceptance Criteria:

The document states: "The following performance data were provided in support of the substantial equivalence determination." These data primarily consist of:

• Electrical safety and electromagnetic compatibility (EMC) testing: Conducted on the CuffGuard device, confirming compliance with IEC 60601-1, IEC 60601-1-6, IEC 60601-1-8, and IEC 60601-1-2 standards.
• Software Verification and Validation Testing: Documentation was provided as recommended by FDA's Guidance for Industry and FDA Staff, "Content of Premarket Submissions for Device Software Functions." The software documentation level for CuffGuard is "enhanced."
• Evaluation of Pressure Range Difference: The difference in pressure range (CuffGuard: 5-40 cmH2O vs. Predicate: 5-50 cmH2O) was "evaluated on the SW verification and validation." The justification states this difference is "not clinically significant" as 40 cmH2O is a "realistic physiological limit and common clinical practice."

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

The document does not mention any clinical test set sample size, data provenance, or whether data was retrospective or prospective. The performance evaluation described is entirely non-clinical (bench testing and software validation).

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 as no clinical test set using expert ground truth is described in the provided document.

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

This information is not applicable as no clinical test set requiring adjudication is described.

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

A multi-reader multi-case (MRMC) comparative effectiveness study was not done. The CuffGuard is described as an "endotracheal tube cuff controller," a hardware device with embedded software for automatic pressure adjustment, not an AI-assisted diagnostic tool that human readers would interpret. The document explicitly states: "No animal or clinical testing was required to demonstrate the substantial equivalence of this device to its predicate, nor its safety and effectiveness."

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

A standalone performance evaluation (bench testing) was performed for the device's technical specifications and software functionality, but not in the context of an AI-driven "algorithm only" performance study. The device's core function is automatic pressure control, which is inherently "standalone" in its operation once user-defined parameters are set. The reported performance metrics (e.g., pressure accuracy, alarm functions) reflect this standalone operational capability.

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

The ground truth for the technical performance was based on engineering specifications, compliance with international standards (IEC 60601 series), and the established performance of the predicate device. For the software, the ground truth was derived from the requirements defined during the software development life cycle, validated through verification and validation testing against these requirements.

8. The sample size for the training set

This information is not applicable as the device is a cuff controller based on established physical principles and software logic, not a machine learning model that requires a "training set" for its core function as described.

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

This information is not applicable as no training set for a machine learning model is mentioned or relevant to the described device. The "ground truth" for the device's functional performance was established through engineering design, compliance with regulatory standards, and validation against specification requirements.

Ask a specific question about this device

The WiTOF is a neuromuscular transmission station (nerve stimulator) that helps to pilot the neuromuscular blockade of adult patients in the operating room, recovery room or intensive care unit.

The WiTOF is a neuromuscular transmission station (nerve stimulator) that helps to pilot the neuromuscular blockade of adult patients in the operating room, recovery room or intensive care unit. It is used by health professionals (anaesthesiologists, doctors, or fully qualified nurse anaesthetists) for:

1. Objective neuromuscular transmission monitoring
2. Subjective neuromuscular transmission monitoring

The continuous monitoring of NMT blocking involves electrical nerve stimulation and the measurement of acceleration in the corresponding muscle (with a three-dimensional acceleration sensor). Based on the force of contraction resulting from the stimulation, it is possible to draw conclusions about the effectiveness of an injected neuromuscular blocking agents or the patient's curare level.

The device and all of the settings associated with it are designed for use on adult patients in hospital or health institutions so that the patient's curare level can be monitored.

The WiTOF system is composed of the station, the wireless sensor (hand), and the US AC power supply unit. The wireless sensor itself consists of the 3D accelerometer in the splint.

The WiTOF can perform several different modes of electrical stimulation in accordance with usual clinical practice:

• TOF (Train Of Four)
• PTC (Post Tetanic Count)
• ATP (Automated TOF PTC)
• DBS (Double Burst) (3,3) (3,2)
• ST (Single Twitch) 0.1 Hz and 1 Hz
• TET (Tetanus) 50 Hz and 100 Hz

The station displays the various stimulation settings, the time elapsed between stimulations, and the results for the measurements made in response to TOF, PTC, and ATP stimulations. The responses to other types of stimulation are gaged visually by the health professional. The device and stimulation settings are chosen using a display screen.

The accessories that can be used with the device include:

• Optic-serial (RS232) cable to transfer data
• Fixation clamp – regular size (10–40 mm / 0.4–1.6 inches)
• Fixation clamp – large size (20–60 mm / 0.8–2.4 inches)

The provided FDA 510(k) clearance letter for the WiTOF device does not contain the detailed performance study results, acceptance criteria, or specific data points typically found in clinical validation reports for AI/software-driven medical devices.

The document states that the software for the WiTOF device was considered of "moderate" level of concern and that "Software verification and validation testing were conducted and documentation was provided as recommended by FDA's Guidance for Industry and FDA Staff, 'Guidance for the Content of Premarket Submissions for Software Contained in Medical Devices.'" However, it does not explicitly describe the acceptance criteria or the specific methodology/results of these tests.

Moreover, the letter explicitly states: "No animal or clinical testing was required to demonstrate the substantial equivalence of this device to its predicate, nor its safety and effectiveness." This indicates that the regulatory clearance was based on demonstrating substantial equivalence primarily through technical comparison and non-clinical performance data (electrical safety, EMC, software V&V) rather than a comparative clinical study.

Therefore, I cannot provide the information requested in your prompt regarding acceptance criteria and the study that proves the device meets them, because this level of detail is not present in the provided 510(k) clearance letter. The letter focuses on regulatory compliance and substantial equivalence to a predicate device, not on a detailed clinical validation study as might be conducted for novel AI algorithms.

If this were an AI/ML medical device submission requiring a detailed performance study, the 510(k) summary would typically include a section describing that study with the elements you've requested (e.g., sample size, ground truth establishment, reader studies). The absence of such a section, along with the statement that no animal or clinical testing was required, confirms that these specific study details are not part of this clearance document.

Ask a specific question about this device

The ToFscan is a neuromuscular transmission monitor for monitoring the neuromuscular block of a patient in the operating theatre, recovery room or intensive care unit.

The ToFscan is a neuromuscular transmission (NMT) monitoring the neuromuscular block of a patient in the operating theatre, recovery room or intensive care unit. It is used by health professionals (anaesthesiologists, doctors, or fully qualified nurse anaesthetists) for:

• 1. Objective neuromuscular transmission monitoring
• 2. Subjective neuromuscular transmission monitoring
     The continuous monitoring of NMT blocking involves the stimulation of the ulnar nerve and the corresponding measurement of acceleration in the adductor muscle of the thumb (with a three-dimensional acceleration sensor). Based on the force of contraction resulting from the stimulation, it is possible to draw conclusions about the effectiveness of an injected neuromuscular blocking agents or the patient's curare level.
     The apparatus and all of the settings associated with it are designed for use on adult and paediatric patients in hospital or health institutions so that the patient's curare level can be monitored.
     The ToFscan system is composed of the monitor, the hand sensor, and the US AC power supply unit. The hand sensor itself consists of the thumb splint/3D accelerometer, the electrode clamps, and the cable which connects to the monitor.
     The ToFscan can perform several different modes of electrical stimulation in accordance with usual clinical practice:
• -TOF (Train Of Four)
• PTC (Post Tetanic Count) -
• -ATP (Automated TOF PTC)
• DBS (Double Burst) (3,3) (3,2) -
• ST (Single Twitch) 0.1 Hz and 1 Hz -
• -TET (Tetanus) 50 Hz
  The monitor displays the various stimulation settings, the time elansed between stimulations, and the results for the measurements made in response to TOF, PTC, and ATP stimulations. The responses to other types of stimulation are gaged visually by the health professional. The device and stimulation settings are chosen using a rotary knob.

The provided text is a 510(k) summary for a medical device called ToFscan, a neuromuscular transmission monitor. The summary focuses on establishing substantial equivalence to a predicate device (TOF-Watch) and includes performance data related to biocompatibility, electrical safety, EMC, and software. However, the document does not contain information about acceptance criteria or a study proving the device meets specific performance criteria in terms of accuracy or efficacy for its intended use.

Therefore, I cannot fulfill your request for:

• A table of acceptance criteria and reported device performance.
• Sample size used for the test set and data provenance.
• Number of experts and their qualifications for ground truth.
• Adjudication method for the test set.
• MRMC comparative effectiveness study results or effect size.
• Standalone performance.
• Type of ground truth used.
• Sample size for the training set.
• How ground truth for the training set was established.

The document explicitly states: "No animal or clinical testing was required to demonstrate the substantial equivalence of this device to its predicate." This indicates that the approval was based on demonstrating similar technical specifications and intended use to an already approved device, rather than new clinical performance data proving specific efficacy or accuracy metrics against defined acceptance criteria.

Ask a specific question about this device