Search Filters

Search Results

Found 1 results

510(k) Data Aggregation

    K Number
    K193514
    Manufacturer
    Date Cleared
    2023-04-13

    (1211 days)

    Product Code
    Regulation Number
    862.1340
    Reference & Predicate Devices
    Why did this record match?
    Device Name :

    AUTION MAX AX-4060 Urinalysis System

    AI/MLSaMDIVD (In Vitro Diagnostic)TherapeuticDiagnosticis PCCP AuthorizedThirdpartyExpeditedreview
    Intended Use

    The AUTION MAX AX-4060 Urinalysis System (AUTION MAX) is comprised of the AUTION MAX AX-4060 automated urine analyzer and AUTION Sticks 9EB multi-parameter test strips.

    The AUTION MAX AX-4060 urine analyzer, when used with AUTION Sticks 9EB test strips is a fully automated urinalysis system intended for the in vitro qualitative or semi-quantitative measurement of the following analytes: glucose, protein, bilirubin, urobilinogen, pH, blood, ketones, nitrite, leukocytes, turbidity, and color. The test results of these parameters can be used in the evaluation of kidney, urinary, liver and other metabolic disorders. This system is intended to be used by trained operators in clinical laboratories.

    AUTION Sticks 9EB test strips are test strips for the in vitro qualitative or semi-quantitative measurement of the following analytes: glucose, protein, bilirubin, urobilinogen, pH, blood, ketones, nitrite, and leukocytes with the AUTION MAX AX-4060 urine analyzer. The test results of these parameters can be used in the evaluation of kidney, urinary, liver and other metabolic disorders.

    Special conditions for use statements: Prescription use only. AUTION Sticks 9EB test strips are not to be read visually.

    Device Description

    The AUTION MAX AX-4060 Urinalysis System is a fully automated urine analyzer that provides a semi-quantitative or qualitative measurement for glucose, protein, bilirubin, urobilinogen, pH, blood, ketones, nitrites, leukocytes, specific gravity, turbidity, and color tone. The AUTION MAX AX-4060 Urinalysis System consists of AUTION MAX AX-4060 urine analyzer and AUTION Sticks 9EB test strips.

    The AUTION Sticks 9EB test strips consist of a plastic strip containing 9 dry chemistry reagent pads impregnated with chemical substances for the determination of the above analytes in urine. These substances if present in urine leads to a chemical reaction that results in a color change, which is measured by the AUTION MAX AX-4060 urine analyzer based on spectrophotometry. In addition, three additional parameters, specific gravity, turbidity, and color tone are directly measured based on reflectance refractometry, transmitted and scattered light measurements.

    AI/ML Overview

    Here's a breakdown of the acceptance criteria and the study that proves the device meets them, based on the provided FDA 510(k) summary:

    Device: AUTION MAX AX-4060 Urinalysis System
    Predicate Device: AUTION MAX AX-4030 Fully Automated Urinalysis System


    1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

    The acceptance criteria are not explicitly stated as distinct numerical targets in the document. Instead, the study aims to demonstrate substantial equivalence to the predicate device. Therefore, the "acceptance criteria" are implicitly understood as matching or performing comparably to the predicate device's established performance, particularly in terms of agreement percentage. The reported device performance is presented as the agreement between the proposed device (AUTION MAX AX-4060) and the predicate device (AUTION MAX AX-4030).

    Key Performance Metric: Percentage of Exact Match and Percentage within +/- 1 Color Block Match compared to the predicate device.

    AnalyteAcceptance Criteria (Implicit: Substantial Equivalence to Predicate)Reported Device Performance (Exact Match %)Reported Device Performance (+/- 1 CB Match %)
    GLUHigh agreement (Exact and +/- 1 CB match)98.1%100.0%
    PROHigh agreement (Exact and +/- 1 CB match)94.5%100.0%
    BILHigh agreement (Exact and +/- 1 CB match)99.5%100.0%
    UROHigh agreement (Exact and +/- 1 CB match)99.2%100.0%
    pHHigh agreement (Exact and +/- 1 CB match)92.9%100.0%
    BLDHigh agreement (Exact and +/- 1 CB match)95.8%100.0%
    KETHigh agreement (Exact and +/- 1 CB match)99.0%100.0%
    NITHigh agreement (Exact and +/- 1 CB match)99.7%100.0%
    LEUHigh agreement (Exact and +/- 1 CB match)98.6%100.0%
    TurbidityHigh agreement (Exact and +/- 1 CB match)98.6%100.0%
    Color toneHigh agreement (Exact and +/- 1 CB match)82.7%100.0%

    (Note: The +/- 1 CB Match indicates results falling within one color block difference from the predicate, which is often considered acceptable for semi-quantitative tests.)


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

    • Sample Size for Test Set (Method Comparison): A total of 1374 samples were used. This included:
      • 1333 natural patient samples
      • 41 spiked samples
    • Data Provenance: The study was conducted at two (2) clinical laboratories. The document does not specify the country of origin, but given the FDA submission, it's likely conducted in or in accordance with standards for the U.S. and/or Japan (where the manufacturer is located). It is a prospective comparison study.

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

    This study does not involve human experts establishing a "ground truth" for each sample in the typical sense of diagnostic imaging or pathology. Instead, the "ground truth" for the method comparison study is the result obtained from the legally marketed predicate device (AUTION MAX AX-4030 Automated Urinalysis System). The study demonstrates the correlation and agreement of the new device's readings with the predicate device's readings. No information is provided about experts interpreting results aside from the automated systems.


    4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set

    Since the "ground truth" is established by the predicate device's results and the comparison is between two automated systems, there was no human adjudication process (e.g., 2+1, 3+1 consensus) described for the test set.


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

    No. A Multi-Reader Multi-Case (MRMC) comparative effectiveness study was not performed. This study evaluates the performance of an automated urinalysis system against a predicate automated system, not the improvement of human readers with AI assistance.


    6. Standalone Performance (Algorithm Only without Human-in-the-Loop Performance)

    Yes. The primary study detailed, especially the Method Comparison (Section 14), assesses the standalone performance of the AUTION MAX AX-4060 Urinalysis System. It compares the results generated by the new automated system directly against those generated by the predicate automated system, without human intervention in the result interpretation or decision-making process during the comparison phase. The device itself is an automated system intended to be used by trained operators in clinical laboratories, but the performance data presented is for the automated analyzer's output.


    7. Type of Ground Truth Used

    The ground truth for the method comparison study was the results obtained from the legally marketed predicate device (AUTION MAX AX-4030 Automated Urinalysis System). For the initial precision study (Tables 3-5), the "Expected Result" for quality controls served as the reference.


    8. Sample Size for the Training Set

    The document is a 510(k) summary for a medical device (urinalysis system), not a typically "AI-driven" software device that undergoes explicit training. The device determines analytes based on chemical reactions and spectrophotometry (reflectance refractometry, transmitted and scattered light measurements). Therefore, there is no explicit "training set" in the context of machine learning algorithms usually discussed. The system is likely calibrated and validated during its development, but this is a different process than training an AI model.


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

    As noted above, there is no explicit "training set" in the machine learning sense for this device. The chemical principles and measurement methods are well-established for urinalysis. Any calibration or internal development would have relied on known concentrations and reference methods for each analyte to ensure accurate colorimetric or other measurements. The basis of the technology relates to established chemical reactions on the test pads (e.g., Glucose oxidase reaction for glucose, Protein-error reaction for protein, etc.).

    Ask a Question

    Ask a specific question about this device

    Page 1 of 1