Search Results

For the quantitative determination of fibrinogen, based on the Clauss method, in human citrated plasma on IL Coagulation Systems.

Several congenital abnormalities of fibrinogen result in impaired conversion of fibrinogen to fibrin during blood coagulation. Fibrinogen is also a useful marker in the evaluation of several disease states including disseminated intravascular coagulation, liver disease, inflammatory diseases and malignancy. High levels of fibrinogen are associated with an increased risk for cardiovascular disease. Increased levels are also found during pregnancy and oral contraceptive use, while reduced levels are found during thrombolytic therapy.

The HemosIL Fibrinogen-C kit and HemosIL Fibrinogen-C XL kit use an excess of thrombin to convert fibrinogen to fibrin in diluted plasma. At high thrombin and low fibrinogen concentration, the rate of reaction is a function of fibrinogen concentration.

This document, an FDA 510(k) clearance letter for HemosIL Fibrinogen-C and HemosIL Fibrinogen-C XL, does not contain the information requested in your prompt regarding acceptance criteria and a study proving the device meets those criteria.

The 510(k) summary clearly states:

• Reason for Submission: "This Special 510(k) is being submitted to remove the reconstituted reagent frozen stability claim of 1 month at -20°C in the original vial for HemosIL Fibrinogen-C and HemosIL Fibrinogen-C XL."
• Data Requirement: "No new performance data are needed to remove the reconstituted reagent frozen stability claim."
• No new performance claims: "Changes to labeled performance claims, except to remove the reconstituted reagent frozen stability claim from the Instructions for Use and add 'Do not freeze reconstituted reagent.'"

Therefore, the document explicitly states that no new performance data or studies were required or submitted for this particular 510(k) clearance. The clearance is based on a minor labeling change related to reagent stability, not on new performance validation.

To provide the information you requested (acceptance criteria, study details, sample sizes, expert involvement, ground truth, etc.), you would need a different type of submission document, such as an original 510(k) application or a PMA, where initial and comprehensive performance validation studies are typically included.

Ask a specific question about this device

HemosIL Fibrinogen-C is intended for the quantitative determination of fibrinogen, based on the Clauss method, in human citrated plasma on IL Coagulation Systems. For in vitro diagnostic use.

The Fibrinogen-C kit uses an excess of thrombin to convert fibrinogen to fibrin in diluted plasma. At high thrombin and low fibrinogen concentration, the rate of reaction is a function of the fibrinogen concentration.

Here's a breakdown of the acceptance criteria and study information for the HemosIL Fibrinogen-C device, based on the provided text:

Acceptance Criteria and Device Performance for HemosIL Fibrinogen-C

The submission details modifications to the HemosIL Fibrinogen-C test parameters on the ACL TOP system. The study aims to demonstrate that these modified parameters are substantially equivalent to the previously marketed device.

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

The document doesn't explicitly state "acceptance criteria" as a separate set of pass/fail thresholds. Instead, it presents the performance of both the "Current Parameters" (predicate device) and the "Modified Parameters" (new device) for comparison, implying that similar or improved performance for the modified parameters constitutes acceptance.

Note on FDP Interference: For FDP, the acceptance criteria are not to maintain "no interference" but rather to accurately characterize and communicate any newly identified interference. The modified parameters identified interference at FDP levels where the current parameters showed none (up to 100 µg/mL), leading to an update in the product insert.

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

The document does not specify the exact sample sizes used for the test sets contributing to the performance data (interference, precision, and linearity).

The document does not explicitly state the data provenance (e.g., country of origin of the data, retrospective or prospective). However, given that this is a 510(k) submission for a medical device in the US, it is implied that the studies were conducted under appropriate regulatory guidelines, likely in the US, and typically involve prospective testing for performance characteristics.

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

This type of in vitro diagnostic (IVD) device (fibrinogen determination) does not typically involve "experts establishing ground truth" in the same way imaging or clinical diagnostic devices might. Instead, the "ground truth" for performance studies of IVD assays is established by:

• Reference Methods: For accuracy and linearity, the "ground truth" would be established by comparing the device's measurements to a known, highly accurate reference method or gravimetric/volumetric preparation of analytes.
• Known Concentrations: For precision studies, specific control levels (Normal, Low Fibrinogen) with known target concentrations are used.
• Spiked Samples: For interference studies, potentially interfering substances are added to samples at known concentrations.

Therefore, no information on the number or qualifications of "experts" for ground truth establishment is provided, as it's not applicable in the traditional sense for this kind of device.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set

Adjudication methods (like 2+1 or 3+1) are typically used for subjective assessments, such as interpreting medical images or clinical outcomes, where human expert consensus is needed. For an IVD device like HemosIL Fibrinogen-C, which provides quantitative measurements, formal adjudication by experts is not applicable. The measurements are objective and evaluated against established analytical performance metrics.

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

No, a Multi-Reader Multi-Case (MRMC) comparative effectiveness study was not done. MRMC studies are used to evaluate the diagnostic performance of devices (often imaging-based AI) when interpreted by multiple human readers, often comparing performance with and without AI assistance. This device is an in vitro diagnostic assay that produces a quantitative result, not an interpretation requiring human readers in the MRMC sense.

6. Standalone Performance (Algorithm Only)

Yes, a standalone performance assessment was effectively done. The performance data presented (interference, precision, linearity) directly reflects the capabilities of the HemosIL Fibrinogen-C reagent and the ACL TOP system's analytical process, independent of human interpretation or intervention beyond standard laboratory procedures for operating the instrument and running the assay. The "algorithm" here refers to the optimized test parameters, incubation time, and math model.

7. Type of Ground Truth Used

The type of ground truth for these studies would be based on:

• Analytical Measurement Standards: For linearity and accuracy, traceable reference materials or highly characterized plasma samples with known fibrinogen concentrations.
• Known Fibrinogen Concentrations: For precision, commercially prepared control materials with assigned target values.
• Spiked Interferent Concentrations: For interference studies, specific concentrations of potentially interfering substances (Heparin, Hemoglobin, Triglycerides, Bilirubin, FDP) added to plasma samples.

The document does not explicitly state the specific reference methods or standards used, but these are standard practices for IVD validation.

8. Sample Size for the Training Set

The document does not explicitly mention a "training set" or its sample size. For an IVD like HemosIL Fibrinogen-C, the "training" analogous to an AI model would be the development and optimization of the assay parameters, calibration levels, incubation time, and math model. This ongoing development process happens internally, often involving numerous experiments, but these are generally not characterized as a distinct "training set" in regulatory submissions, which focus on the final validation data.

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

As with the "test set" ground truth, for the optimization/development (analogous to "training") phase of an IVD, the ground truth would be established through a combination of:

• Analytical Chemistry Principles: Ensuring the Clauss method is accurately implemented.
• Reference Materials: Using validated reference materials for calibration and early performance checks.
• Methodology Development: Iteratively testing and refining parameters (e.g., thrombin concentration, reaction time, dilution protocols, mathematical models) to achieve desired analytical performance characteristics (sensitivity, specificity, linearity, precision) against known standards and characterized samples.

The specific details of this internal development process for establishing ground truth are not provided in this 510(k) summary, which focuses on the final validation results.

Ask a specific question about this device