Search Results

The RAPIDPoint® 500 System measurement cartridge with calibrators is an in vitro diagnostic product for the calibration of the analytes on the RAPIDPoint® 500 System. The analytes measured are partial pressure of carbon dioxide (pCO2), partial pressure of oxygen (pO2), pH, Sodium (Na*), Potassium (K*), ionized Calcium (Ca**), Chloride (Cl7), Glucose (Glu), total hemoglobin (tHb), Neonatal Bilirubin and Lactate (Lac).

The RAPIDPoint® 500 System consists of four (4) calibrators contained in the measurement cartridge and wash/waste cartridge that are used to calibrate the following analytes: pH, partial pressure of oxygen (pO2), partial pressure of carbon dioxide (pCO2), Sodium (Na ), Potassium (K ), ionized Calcium (Ca *), Chloride (Cl), Glucose (Glu), total hemoglobin (tHb) and Lactate (Lac). There is no unique calibration measurement for Neonatal Bilirubin (nBili) as the tHb calibration is used.

The measurement cartridge contains the following calibrators: 200 Cal, Reagent C and Low Sulfite Zero Cal. The wash/waste cartridge contains the wash reagent.

The provided text describes the RAPIDPoint® 500 System Measurement Cartridge with Calibrators, an in vitro diagnostic product intended for the calibration of analytes on the RAPIDPoint® 500 System. The document is a 510(k) summary submitted to the FDA for market clearance.

Here's an analysis of the acceptance criteria and the study that proves the device meets them, based on the provided text:

1. A table of acceptance criteria and the reported device performance

The document does not explicitly present a table of acceptance criteria and reported device performance in the same manner one might expect for a clinical study comparing an AI device to ground truth. Instead, the "acceptance criteria" are implied by the process of establishing traceability and stability for the calibrators, and the "reported device performance" is the successful demonstration that these criteria were met.

The key acceptance criteria for this type of device (calibrator) relate to stability and traceability of the assigned values.

Traceability Methods (which inherently function as acceptance criteria for the accuracy of calibrator values):

• pH: Traceable to NIST SRM186 reference materials via the IFCC blood reference method.
• pCO2: Traceable to tonometered aqueous standards prepared using NIST traceable temperature and pressure standards and gravimetrically prepared precision gas standards.
• pO2: Traceable to tonometered aqueous standards prepared using NIST traceable temperature and pressure standards and gravimetrically prepared precision gas standards.
• K+: Traceable to NIST SRM 918 reference materials using flame photometry.
• Na+: Traceable to NIST SRM 919 reference material using flame photometry.
• Ca++: Traceable to gravimetrically prepared internal standards using NIST SRM 915 and ISE methods embodied in Siemens blood gas analyzers.
• Cl-: Traceable to NIST SRM 919 or 918 reference materials using a Coulometric reference method.
• Glucose: Traceable to NIST SRM 917 reference materials using the Hexokinase method.
• tHb: Traceable to internal standards calibrated against the CLSI Cyanmethemoglobin method.
• Lactate: Traceable to high purity lactate using the Lactate dehydrogenase spectrophotometric method.
• Neonatal Bilirubin (nBili): No unique calibrator; associated with tHb, which is traceable as noted above.

Study Type:

The "study" described is primarily a validation process to ensure the calibrators meet predefined performance specifications related to stability, traceability, and value assignment. This is not a typical clinical trial with patient cohorts, but rather a quality control and analytical performance validation for an in vitro diagnostic calibrator.

2. Sample size used for the test set and the data provenance (e.g. country of origin of the data, retrospective or prospective)

This document does not refer to a "test set" or "training set" in the context of an AI/algorithm. Instead, it discusses the testing of calibrator lots to confirm their stability and the methods used to establish their traceability and assigned values.

• Sample size: The document mentions "multiple measurements" and "multiple test systems" for value assignment, and "testing data" for stability. It does not provide specific numerical sample sizes for these tests (e.g., number of calibrator vials tested, number of measurements per vial, number of lots).
• Data provenance: Not specified. Given it's a product from Siemens Healthcare Diagnostics Inc., based in Norwood, MA, USA, the testing would likely have been conducted in their labs or by accredited partners. The "retrospective or prospective" nature usually applies to patient data collections; here, it would be a prospective manufacturing and quality control process for each lot of calibrator.

3. 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)

This is not applicable to this type of device. The "ground truth" for the calibrators is established through traceability to internationally recognized reference materials (e.g., NIST SRMs) and validated reference methods (e.g., IFCC, CLSI). It does not involve human expert interpretation of images or clinical cases. The "experts" involved would be analytical chemists, metrologists, and quality control professionals with expertise in these highly standardized laboratory techniques.

4. Adjudication method (e.g. 2+1, 3+1, none) for the test set

Not applicable. This concept pertains to resolving discrepancies among human readers or between human readers and an AI algorithm in diagnostic accuracy studies. For calibrator validation, the "adjudication" is inherent in the rigorous, multi-measurement, and traceable methods used to assign values and confirm stability, following established quality management systems.

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 not an AI-powered diagnostic device, but a calibrator for a blood gas analysis system. Therefore, MRMC studies and "human reader improvement with AI assistance" are irrelevant.

6. If a standalone (i.e. algorithm only without human-in-the-loop performance) was done

Not applicable. This device is not an algorithm. It is a physical calibrator used within an analytical instrument (RAPIDPoint 500 System).

7. The type of ground truth used (expert concensus, pathology, outcomes data, etc)

The "ground truth" for the calibrator values is based on traceability to primary and secondary reference materials and reference methods, rather than expert consensus, pathology, or outcomes data.

• For instance, pH is traceable to NIST SRM186.
• Sodium (Na+) is traceable to NIST SRM 919.
• Hemoglobin (tHb) is traceable to internal standards calibrated against the CLSI Cyanmethemoglobin method.

8. The sample size for the training set

Not applicable. This device does not use machine learning or AI, so there is no training set in that context.

9. How the ground truth for the training set was established

Not applicable. As there is no AI training set, this question is not relevant. The "ground truth" for the performance characteristics of the calibrator itself is established through the rigorous metrological traceability and analytical validation processes outlined above.

Ask a specific question about this device