Search Results

The Dual Lumen Extended Length Catheter (dELC) is indicated for use up to 72 hours in attaining vascular venous access for use with the Aquadex FlexFlow® and Aquadex SmartFlow® systems for ultrafiltration therapy. It is not for pediatric use. The catheter is not intended for the infusion of medications or fluids, for laboratory sampling, or other venous access needs.

The Dual Lumen Extended Length Catheter (dELC) is a 6F reverse-tapered dual lumen venous access device with stainless steel coil reinforcement. It is inserted into peripheral venous circulation by way of a peel away introducer. The catheter is intended for use with the Aquadex FlexFlow® and Aquadex SmartFlow® Systems in attaining vascular venous access for ultrafiltration treatment of patients with fluid overload. It has two models, 320101 and 320102, with identical hub designs but different shaft lengths, 12 cm and 16 cm, to adapt to the patient's body size.

The catheter has a radiopaque polyurethane shaft with two equal-sized inner lumens designed in a "double D" configuration. The shaft has a reverse-tapered design to minimize resistance to flow. Its outside diameter starts at 6F on the distal end and tapers back to 7F on the proximal end. The shaft with the coil reinforcement, designed based on the FDA cleared 5.2F dELC via K041791, provides kinking resistance and ensures consistent flow. Depth markings are provided in 0.5cm increments along the insertable length of the catheter shaft. The proximal end of the catheter shaft and clear polyurethane extension tubes are over-molded into a polyurethane hub, which has suture wings for securement to the skin.

Additionally, the catheter has female ISO 80369-compliant luer connectors to connect with the Aquadex blood tubing set for withdrawal and infusion. When the catheter is not in use, two yellow male locking caps can be placed on the female luer connectors for reducing the risk of infection. Each extension tube has a clamp: blue on the blood withdrawal tube (marked by the withdrawal ID ring) and white on the blood infusion tube (marked by the infusion ID ring). The blood is drawn up through the withdrawal lumen, which is proximal to the infusion lumen. The skived offset tip is designed to minimize blood recirculation.

An attached MRI tag indicates the device is MR unsafe.

The provided FDA 510(k) clearance letter (K252226) describes a medical device, the Dual Lumen Extended Length Catheter (dELC), and details the rationale for its substantial equivalence to a predicate device. This submission focuses on a material change to an existing cleared device, rather than a de novo submission for a novel AI/software device. Therefore, the information typically requested regarding acceptance criteria and study proving performance for an AI/software device (e.g., accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, MRMC studies, ground truth establishment) is not applicable in this context.

The acceptance criteria here pertain to the safety and effectiveness equivalency of the modified medical device (specifically, the change in material for the Female Luer Lock Connector) compared to its predicate. The study conducted is non-clinical performance testing rather than a clinical trial or AI model validation.

Here's a breakdown of the available information relevant to "acceptance criteria" and "study that proves the device meets the acceptance criteria" in the context of this specific 510(k) submission:

Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance (for a Material Change)

The core acceptance criterion for this 510(k) submission is to demonstrate that the change in material for the Female Luer Lock Connector does not raise new questions of safety and effectiveness and that the modified device remains substantially equivalent to the predicate device.

Information NOT APPLICABLE to this 510(k) (as it's a material change, not an AI/software device):

The following points are standard for AI/software device clearances but are not relevant to this specific 510(k) for a material change in a physical medical device.

2. Sample sizes used for the test set and data provenance: Not applicable. The "test set" here refers to physical samples of the device undergoing non-clinical bench testing, not a dataset for an algorithm. Data provenance (country, retrospective/prospective) is typically for patient data used in AI validation.
3. Number of experts used to establish ground truth for the test set and qualifications: Not applicable. There is no "ground truth" to establish in the context of an algorithmic output. The performance tests are specific to the mechanical and chemical properties of the device.
4. Adjudication method for the test set: Not applicable. No human interpretation or adjudication of an algorithm's output.
5. If a multi-reader multi-case (MRMC) comparative effectiveness study was done: Not applicable. MRMC studies are used to assess the impact of AI on human reader performance, which doesn't apply to this physical device change.
6. If a standalone (i.e., algorithm only without human-in-the-loop performance) was done: Not applicable. This is not an algorithm.
7. The type of ground truth used: Not applicable. Ground truth typically refers to a verified diagnosis or measurement used to evaluate an AI model's accuracy. For this device, "ground truth" would be established through calibrated instruments measuring physical properties.
8. The sample size for the training set: Not applicable. There is no AI model or training set involved.
9. How the ground truth for the training set was established: Not applicable.

In summary, this 510(k) demonstrates substantial equivalence through non-clinical bench testing to affirm that a material change to a connector on a physical medical device does not compromise its safety or effectiveness when compared to the previously cleared predicate device. It specifically avoids the need for clinical studies by establishing this equivalence.

Ask a specific question about this device