Search Filters

Search Results

Found 1 results

510(k) Data Aggregation

    K Number
    K051922
    Manufacturer
    Date Cleared
    2005-09-14

    (61 days)

    Product Code
    Regulation Number
    890.5500
    Reference & Predicate Devices
    Predicate For
    N/A
    AI/MLSaMDIVD (In Vitro Diagnostic)TherapeuticDiagnosticis PCCP AuthorizedThirdpartyExpeditedreview
    Intended Use

    The 'MLS Family' Diode Laser is intended to provide topical heating for the purpose of elevating tissue temperature for temporary relief of muscle and joint pain and stiffness, arthritis pain, or muscle spasm, the temporary increase in local blood circulation and/or promoting relaxation of muscle.

    Device Description

    The 'MLS Family' Diode Laser provides 808 and 905 nm wavelengths. Laser emission activation is by user selectable controller. Electrical requirement is 230 VAC, 20A, 50-60 Hz, single phase.

    AI/ML Overview

    I am sorry, but I cannot provide the requested information because the provided text does not contain any acceptance criteria or a study demonstrating device performance against such criteria.

    The document is a 510(k) summary for a medical device (MLS Family Diode Laser) and the associated FDA clearance letter. These documents primarily focus on demonstrating substantial equivalence to a legally marketed predicate device, rather than presenting de novo performance criteria or results from a clinical study to prove such criteria are met.

    Here's why the information cannot be extracted based on the input provided:

    • No Acceptance Criteria: The 510(k) summary lists "Nonclinical Performance Data: none" and "Clinical Performance Data: none." This explicitly states that no performance data was submitted or reviewed. Therefore, there are no acceptance criteria outlined for such performance.
    • No Study Details: Without any performance data, there is no study described to analyze. All the sub-points you requested (sample size, data provenance, ground truth, MRMC study, standalone performance, training set details) are contingent on a study being performed and reported, which is not the case here.
    • Focus on Substantial Equivalence: The primary objective of this 510(k) submission was to establish "substantial equivalence" to a predicate device, as explicitly stated in the "Comparison" section. This process often relies on demonstrating similar design, materials, and intended use as a device already on the market, rather than conducting new clinical trials with specific performance targets.
    Ask a Question

    Ask a specific question about this device

    Page 1 of 1