Search Results

The Sensititre Haemophilus/Streptococcus pneumoniae (HP) MIC Susceptibility plate is an in vitro diagnostic product for clinical susceptibility testing of Streptococcus pneumoniae and Haemophilus influenzae.

This 510(k) is for the addition of Meropenem in the dilution range of 0.016 - 2 ug/ml to the Sensititre Haemophilus/Streptococcus pneumoniae MIC panel for testing Streptococcus pneumoniae and Haemophilus influenzac isolates. The "Indications for Use" and clinical significance of Meropenem is for: Streptococcus pneumoniae (excluding penicillin-resistant strains)

Sensititre™ Haemophilus/Streptococcus pneumoniae (HP) MIC Susceptibility Plates, Meropenem

The provided text describes the 510(k) premarket notification for the "Sensititre™ Haemophilus/Streptococcus pneumoniae (HP) MIC Susceptibility Plates, Meropenem." This submission is for the addition of Meropenem to an existing in vitro diagnostic product for clinical susceptibility testing.

Here's an analysis of the acceptance criteria and study information, based on the provided document:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

Explanation: The document is a 510(k) clearance letter. In 510(k) submissions for antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) devices, the acceptance criteria typically involve demonstrating substantial equivalence to a predicate device, which usually means meeting specific performance targets (e.g., essential agreement and categorical agreement within defined percentages) when comparing the new device's results to a reference method (like broth microdilution or agar dilution). However, these specific numerical criteria and the actual performance results are not detailed in this summary letter. The letter simply confirms the FDA's determination of substantial equivalence.

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

The document does not explicitly state the sample size used for the test set or the data provenance (e.g., country of origin, retrospective/prospective).

3. Number of Experts Used to Establish Ground Truth and Qualifications

The document does not provide information on the number or qualifications of experts used to establish ground truth. For AST devices, the "ground truth" (or reference method) is typically established by well-defined laboratory methodologies, not individual expert interpretation.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set

The document does not describe any adjudication method. For AST, the reference method results are generally considered definitive, not subject to adjudication.

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

No, an MRMC comparative effectiveness study was not done, as this is not applicable for an in vitro diagnostic device like an antimicrobial susceptibility test. MRMC studies are typically used to evaluate the performance of diagnostic imaging devices or other tests that rely on human interpretation.

6. Standalone Performance Study

Yes, a standalone performance study would have been performed as part of the 510(k) submission to demonstrate the performance of the Sensititre™ Haemophilus/Streptococcus pneumoniae (HP) MIC Susceptibility Plates with Meropenem. This study would involve testing a set of bacterial isolates with known susceptibility to Meropenem using the device and comparing the results to a reference method (e.g., broth microdilution). While the results of this study are not in this letter, such a study is fundamental to gaining 510(k) clearance for an AST device.

7. Type of Ground Truth Used

The ground truth for antimicrobial susceptibility testing is typically established by a reference method, most commonly:

• Broth Microdilution (BMD): This is the gold standard for determining minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs).
• Agar Dilution: Another established reference method.

The FDA's review for AST devices requires comparison to these standard methods.

8. Sample Size for the Training Set

The document does not provide information on the sample size for the training set. For in vitro diagnostic products, particularly those using established methodologies, a distinct "training set" in the machine learning sense is often not applicable in the same way as for AI/ML-driven devices. The development of an AST panel relies on extensive historical data and established breakpoints.

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

Not applicable in the typical sense of AI/ML training data. The "ground truth" (reference method) for establishing the validity and accuracy of the susceptibility plate would have been based on standardized laboratory protocols (e.g., CLSI guidelines) for determining resistance and susceptibility profiles of various bacterial isolates to Meropenem. These protocols define how to obtain accurate MIC values using reference methods.

Ask a specific question about this device