Search Filters

Search Results

Found 1 results

510(k) Data Aggregation

    K Number
    K012071
    Device Name
    ENT LASERVISION
    Manufacturer
    Date Cleared
    2001-12-03

    (154 days)

    Product Code
    Regulation Number
    878.4810
    Reference & Predicate Devices
    N/A
    Predicate For
    N/A
    AI/MLSaMDIVD (In Vitro Diagnostic)TherapeuticDiagnosticis PCCP AuthorizedThirdpartyExpeditedreview
    Intended Use

    The ENT LaserVision is a device to be used in conjunction with the UN-L25 CO2 Laser in The ENI Laser Vision is a device to be used far computer membrane and Myringotomy .

    Device Description

    Laser Otoscope, Device Model: ENT LaserVision

    AI/ML Overview

    The provided text is a 510(k) premarket notification letter from the FDA to Union Medical USA regarding their ENT LaserVision device. This document primarily focuses on regulatory approval and does not contain the detailed information necessary to answer the questions about acceptance criteria and study design.

    Specifically, the document states:

    • It is a 510(k) review, which determines "substantial equivalence" to a legally marketed predicate device, rather than requiring new clinical efficacy or performance studies in the same way a PMA would.
    • The device is a "Laser surgical instrument for use in general and plastic surgery and in dermatology" (K012071) and is classified as II.
    • The "Indications for Use" for the ENT LaserVision are "to be used in conjunction with the UN-L25 CO2 Laser in The ENI Laser Vision is a device to be used far computer membrane and Myringotomy." This is a typo, and it likely intends to say "for tympanic membrane and Myringotomy".

    Since this is a substantial equivalence determination, rigorous clinical trials with acceptance criteria, sample sizes, ground truth establishment, or expert reviews are typically not required as they would be for a PMA or novel device. The FDA's letter confirms substantial equivalence based on the information provided in Union Medical USA's 510(k) submission, which would compare the new device's technological characteristics and performance (e.g., laser power, wavelength, safety features) to a predicate device.

    Therefore, I cannot extract the requested information from the provided text. The document does not describe a study that sets acceptance criteria or proves the device meets them in the way the questions imply for AI/diagnostic devices.

    Ask a Question

    Ask a specific question about this device

    Page 1 of 1