Search Results

SASTM Blood/Serum/Urine hCG is a visual and rapid test for the qualitative determination of human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) in whole blood, serum or urine to aid in the early detection of pregnancy. The test is for professional use.

The SAS Blood/Serum/Urine Test utilizes the same antibodies and 90% of the same test construction of the Modified SAS Serum/Urine test. The most significant difference in the SAS Blood/Serum/Test is that it utilizes a red blood cell separation media that separates plasma from the whole blood cell component.

The provided text describes a 510(k) submission for the SASTM Blood/Serum/Urine hCG diagnostic device. This is a point-of-care test for pregnancy detection. The submission primarily focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence to a predicate device.

Here's an analysis of the requested information based on the provided text:

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

The provided text does not explicitly state specific acceptance criteria (e.g., minimum sensitivity, specificity, or accuracy percentages) or detailed performance data for the SASTM Blood/Serum/Urine hCG device against such criteria. Instead, it focuses on comparing the new device's features and characteristics to a modified version of a predicate device (Modified SAS Serum/Urine hCG Test) and asserts that "These modifications do not affect the performance, safety or efficacy of the product."

The table provided is a comparison of device characteristics, not a performance table against pre-defined acceptance criteria.

The statement "These modifications do not affect the performance, safety or efficacy of the product. Please refer to the data included in this submission" strongly implies that the performance (sensitivity and specificity) is expected to be equivalent to the predicate, with the primary change being the addition of whole blood testing capability and the associated blood cell separation media. However, the specific data demonstrating this equivalence is not present in the provided snippets.

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

The provided text does not include information on the sample size used for any test set or the data provenance (country of origin, retrospective/prospective). It mentions "data included in this submission" but the data itself is not provided.

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)

The provided text does not include information on the number or qualifications of experts used to establish ground truth. For a pregnancy test, ground truth would typically be established by laboratory methods (e.g., quantitative hCG assays) rather than expert review of images, but the document doesn't detail this.

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

The provided text does not include information on any adjudication method.

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

This question is not applicable to the SASTM Blood/Serum/Urine hCG device. This device is a rapid diagnostic test for hCG, not an AI-assisted diagnostic tool that would involve human readers interpreting images or data with or without AI assistance.

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

This question is not applicable to the SASTM Blood/Serum/Urine hCG device. It is a lateral flow immunoassay that human users read visually, not an algorithm.

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

The provided text does not explicitly state the type of ground truth used. However, for an hCG test, the typical ground truth would be established by comparing the rapid test results to a more sensitive and quantitative laboratory method (e.g., a laboratory-based quantitative immunoassay for hCG) or clinical outcomes (e.g., confirmation of pregnancy by ultrasound or subsequent clinical events).

8. The sample size for the training set

The provided text does not include information on any training set sample size. This type of information is typically relevant for machine learning or AI models, which is not the case for this device.

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

The provided text does not include information on how ground truth was established for a training set. As mentioned in point 8, this device is not an AI/ML system.

In summary:

The provided document is a 510(k) summary for a rapid diagnostic pregnancy test, focusing on demonstrating substantial equivalence to a predicate device based on manufacturing and design similarities. It lacks detailed performance data, study methodologies, or information about specific acceptance criteria, expert involvement, or ground truth establishment that would be present in a comprehensive study report. The core assertion is that the modifications (primarily adding whole blood compatibility) do not affect the device's performance, safety, or efficacy, and this is supported by "data included in this submission" which is not provided here.

Ask a specific question about this device