Search Filters

Search Results

Found 1 results

510(k) Data Aggregation

    K Number
    K242718
    Date Cleared
    2025-02-28

    (171 days)

    Product Code
    Regulation Number
    868.5440
    Reference & Predicate Devices
    Why did this record match?
    Device Name :

    Portable Oxygen Concentrator (P2-TOC)

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

    The Portable Oxygen Concentrator P2-TOC is intended to provide supplemental low flow oxygen.

    The device is not intended for life support, nor does it provide any patient monitoring capabilities. This device is for adults only.

    Device Description

    The Portable Oxygen Concentrator P2-TOC is a device that uses the principle of molecular sieve pressure swing adsorption to increase oxygen concentration by adsorption of nitrogen and other gas components. The device needs to be used with a nasal oxygen cannula, which can provide oxygen supplementation to the user.

    The Portable Oxygen Concentrator P2-TOC has two oxygen supply modes, namely continuous oxygen supply mode and pulse oxygen supply mode. Hereinafter referred to as "continuous mode" and "pulse mode" .

    In the continuous mode, the Portable Oxygen Concentrator P2-TOC can continuously deliver oxygen at a fixed flow rate. In the pulse mode, the Portable Oxygen Concentrator P2-TOC is able to deliver oxygen only when the user inhales by detecting the human respiratory rate.

    AI/ML Overview

    The provided text describes a 510(k) premarket notification for a Portable Oxygen Concentrator (P2-TOC). It details the device's characteristics and compares it to predicate devices to demonstrate substantial equivalence. However, the document does not contain information related to an AI/ML-enabled device or a study involving human experts, ground truth establishment, or comparative effectiveness with AI assistance.

    Therefore, I cannot fulfill most of the requested points as the provided document is for a physical medical device (portable oxygen concentrator) and not an AI/ML diagnostic or therapeutic device.

    The document primarily focuses on:

    • Device Description and Indications for Use: What the portable oxygen concentrator does.
    • Principle of Operation: How it separates oxygen from air.
    • Comparison with Predicate Devices: Demonstrating similarity in function and safety to already-marketed oxygen concentrators.
    • Non-Clinical Tests Performed: This section lists various engineering and safety standards (electrical safety, EMC, software verification, biocompatibility) that the device complies with. These are standard tests for medical devices to ensure quality and safety, not AI model performance.
    • Absence of Clinical Accuracy Testing: Explicitly states "There was no clinical testing performed." This is common for 510(k) submissions where substantial equivalence can be demonstrated through non-clinical means.

    Here's what I can extract from the provided text regarding acceptance criteria and performance, focusing on what is relevant for a physical medical device:

    The "acceptance criteria" for a physical device like a Portable Oxygen Concentrator are typically defined by compliance with recognized consensus standards and performance specifications. The "study that proves the device meets the acceptance criteria" refers to the non-clinical testing performed to show compliance with these standards and performance specifications.

    1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance (Based on "Comparison with predicate device" and "Non-Clinical Tests Performed"):

    Acceptance Criteria CategorySpecific Acceptance Standard/Criterion (Implied or Explicit)Reported Device Performance / Compliance
    Safety & ElectricalANSI AAMI ES 60601-1 (General Safety)Complies with AAMI ANSI ES60601-1
    IEC 60601-1-11 (Home Healthcare)Complies with IEC 60601-1-11
    Electromagnetic Comp.IEC 60601-1-2 (EMC)Complies with IEC 60601-1-2
    Performance (Oxygen Conc.)ISO 80601-2-69 (Oxygen Concentrator Equ.)Complies with ISO 80601-2-69
    ISO 80601-2-67 (Oxygen-conserving Equ.)Complies with ISO 80601-2-67
    SoftwareIEC 62304 (Software Verification)Complies; Software V&V performed per FDA Guidance
    UsabilityIEC 60601-1-6 (Usability)Complies with IEC 60601-1-6
    AlarmsIEC 60601-1-8 (Alarm Systems)Complies with IEC 60601-1-8
    BiocompatibilityISO 18562-1, -2, -3 (Breathing Gas Pathways)Complies with ISO 18562-1, -2, -3
    ISO 10993-1, -5, -10, -23 (Biological Evaluation - Patient Contact)Complies with ISO 10993-1, -5, -10, -23
    Battery SafetyIEC 62133-2 (Lithium Batteries)Complies with IEC 62133-2
    Oxygen Concentration90%-3%/+6% at all settings (P2-TOC)"90%-3%/+6% at all settings" (vs. Predicates 90% +/- 3%) - Risk mitigated by ISO 80601-2-67: 2020 testing.
    Acoustic Noise≤ 60dB (A) (Gear 10 of pulse mode/ Gear 5 of continuous mode)"litter bigger than predicate device Model 1000" but "standard requirements have been met" (ISO 80601-2-69, IEC 60601-1)
    Physical Dimensions/Weight(Not a specific standard, but compared to predicates)Different from predicates but risks mitigated by ISO 80601-2-69, EC60601-1, ISO 80601-2-67 testing.
    Flow Rates(Not a specific standard, but compared to predicates)Continuous: 1.0-3.0 LPM (Same as predicates). Pulse: 5-200 ml Pulse Volumes (differs from predicates, max flow rate is smaller) - risks mitigated by various ISO/IEC testing.

    Regarding the points specific to AI/ML devices, I must state that the document does not provide the requested information for the following reasons:

    2. Sample size used for the test set and the data provenance: Not applicable. This document describes testing for a physical device's compliance with engineering standards, not an AI model trained on data. There is no concept of a "test set" from a data perspective. The "testing" refers to bench testing of the physical hardware and embedded software. Data provenance would not be a relevant concept as it pertains to clinical data for AI model training/testing.

    3. Number of experts used to establish the ground truth for the test set and the qualifications of those experts: Not applicable. No clinical test set or ground truth established by experts is mentioned. The ground truth for device performance is based on physical measurements against established engineering and medical device standards.

    4. Adjudication method (e.g. 2+1, 3+1, none) for the test set: Not applicable. No clinical test set requiring expert adjudication.

    5. 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: Not applicable. This is a physical oxygen concentrator, not an AI-assisted diagnostic or therapeutic device that would involve human readers.

    6. If a standalone (i.e. algorithm only without human-in-the loop performance) was done: Not applicable. This refers to a physical device, not a standalone AI algorithm. While it has embedded software, its "performance" is measured by its physical output (oxygen concentration, flow rate) and adherence to safety standards, not by an algorithm's classification or detection accuracy.

    7. The type of ground truth used (expert concensus, pathology, outcomes data, etc): Not applicable. The "ground truth" for this device's performance is determined by direct measurement of physical parameters (e.g., oxygen purity, flow volume, noise levels) and compliance with specified engineering and safety standards, as detailed in the "Non-Clinical Tests Performed" section.

    8. The sample size for the training set: Not applicable. This is for an AI/ML model, not a physical medical device. The device itself is manufactured; it doesn't "learn" from a training set in the AI sense.

    9. How the ground truth for the training set was established: Not applicable. See point 8.

    In summary, the provided document is a regulatory submission for a physical Portable Oxygen Concentrator, and therefore, the information requested, which pertains to AI/ML device performance and validation studies, is not present. The "acceptance criteria" and "study that proves the device meets the acceptance criteria" for this device are based on demonstrating compliance with a comprehensive set of recognized consensus engineering and safety standards through non-clinical bench testing.

    Ask a Question

    Ask a specific question about this device

    Page 1 of 1