Search Results

The Benelli Access Device is a 4 F intravascular over-the-needle catheter consisting of a 6.9 cm high-density polyethylene shaft and a polypropylene hub. The distal end of the shaft terminates in a tapered tip for smooth entry into the vasculature. A polypropylene rotating suture wing is provided on the distal end of the hub and is used to secure the catheter to the patient and prevent dislodgement. The catheter hub has a sidearm that attaches to extension tubing. A three-way stopcock is attached to the distal end of the extension tubing to provide multiple access points to the catheter lumen, allowing for easier flushing, fluid delivery, and blood sampling.

The Benelli Access Device is sold as part of an intravascular catheterization kit. This kit includes the following components:

. Benelli Access Device (4 F x 6.9 cm catheter with sidearm tubing and 3-way stopcock)
Intraluminal protection system (needleless access port)
21 G x 9 cm echogenic needle .
. 0.018" x 40 cm guidewire.

AI/ML Overview

The provided 510(k) summary for the Benelli Access Device describes a medical device, not an AI/ML algorithm. Therefore, many of the requested categories related to AI/ML study design are not applicable.

However, I can extract the relevant information regarding the device's acceptance criteria and the studies that prove it meets those criteria, as detailed in an FDA submission for a traditional medical device.

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

Acceptance Criteria / Test	Reported Device Performance
Technological Characteristics (Bench Testing)
Insertion force	Qualified (Results were satisfactory, demonstrating substantial equivalence to predicate devices and fitness for intended use).
Radiopacity	Qualified (Results were satisfactory, demonstrating substantial equivalence to predicate devices and fitness for intended use).
Liquid leak	Qualified (Results were satisfactory, demonstrating substantial equivalence to predicate devices and fitness for intended use).
Aspiration	Qualified (Results were satisfactory, demonstrating substantial equivalence to predicate devices and fitness for intended use).
Tensile	Qualified (Results were satisfactory, demonstrating substantial equivalence to predicate devices and fitness for intended use).
Corrosion	Qualified (Results were satisfactory, demonstrating substantial equivalence to predicate devices and fitness for intended use).
Kink	Qualified (Results were satisfactory, demonstrating substantial equivalence to predicate devices and fitness for intended use).
Biocompatibility Testing (per ISO 10993-1)
Cytotoxicity	Passed (Results indicated no new safety or performance questions).
Acute systemic toxicity	Passed (Results indicated no new safety or performance questions).
Sensitization	Passed (Results indicated no new safety or performance questions).
Hemocompatibility	Passed (Results indicated no new safety or performance questions).
Irritation/intracutaneous reactivity	Passed (Results indicated no new safety or performance questions).
Material Suitability	Evaluated through bench testing and biomaterial assessments. The materials are commonly used in vascular access devices, and the evaluation found no new safety or performance concerns.

Study Proving Device Meets Acceptance Criteria:

The Benelli Access Device demonstrates substantial equivalence to predicate devices (K021120 Arrow Arterial Catheterization Device and K032843 Nexiva Closed IV Catheter System) based on comparisons of functionality, technological characteristics, and Indications for Use. The device design was qualified through a series of design verification tests and biocompatibility assessments.

Details on the Study:

The document describes the following types of studies:

Design Verification Testing (Bench Testing): This involved a series of tests to ensure the device's physical and mechanical properties met the pre-defined specifications. These tests included insertion force, radiopacity, liquid leak, aspiration, tensile strength, corrosion resistance, and kink resistance. The report states that the "Results of the design verification testing ... did not raise new safety or performance questions." This implies the device met its pre-established performance criteria for these parameters.
Biocompatibility Testing: Conducted per ISO 10993-1, this testing evaluated the biological response to the device materials. Specific tests included cytotoxicity, acute systemic toxicity, sensitization, hemocompatibility, and irritation/intracutaneous reactivity. Similar to design verification, the report indicates that "biomaterial assessments did not raise new safety or performance questions," meaning the device materials were found to be safe for their intended biological contact.
Material Suitability Evaluation: While not a "study" in the traditional sense, the document mentions an evaluation of material suitability for clinical use. This involved reviewing the common use of the selected materials in vascular access devices and confirming their appropriateness through bench testing and biomaterial assessments.

Not Applicable (N/A) Categories for this Device (as it is not an AI/ML system):

The following points are not applicable as this document describes a traditional medical catheter and not a diagnostic AI/ML algorithm.

Sample sized used for the test set and the data provenance (e.g. country of origin of the data, retrospective or prospective): N/A (No patient data or "test set" in the context of an AI/ML algorithm was used).
Number of experts used to establish the ground truth for the test set and the qualifications of those experts (e.g. radiologist with 10 years of experience): N/A (Ground truth from experts is not applicable to a physical device's performance testing).
Adjudication method (e.g. 2+1, 3+1, none) for the test set: N/A.
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: N/A.
If a standalone (i.e. algorithm only without human-in-the-loop performance) was done: N/A.
The type of ground truth used (expert consensus, pathology, outcomes data, etc): N/A. The "ground truth" for this device is the pre-defined engineering specifications and ISO standards for device performance and biocompatibility.
The sample size for the training set: N/A (No training set for an AI/ML algorithm).
How the ground truth for the training set was established: N/A.

Ask a Question

Ask a specific question about this device

Page 1 of 1