Search Results

The monitor B105M, B125M, B155M, B105P and B125P are portable multi-parameter patient monitors intended to be used for monitoring, recording, and to generate alarms for multiple physiological parameters of adult, pediatric, and neonatal patients in a hospital environment and during intra-hospital transport.

The monitor B105M, B125M, B155M, B105P and B125P are intended for use under the direct supervision of a licensed health care practitioner.

The monitor B105M, B125M, B155M, B105P and B125P are not Apnea monitors (i.e., do not rely on the device for detection or alarm for the cessation of breathing). These devices should not be used for life sustaining/supporting purposes.

The monitor B105M, B125M, B155M, B105P and B125P are not intended for use during MRI.

The monitor B105M, B125M, B155M, B105P and B125P can be stand-alone monitors or interfaced to other devices via network.

The monitor B105M, B125M, B155M, B105P and B125P monitor and display: ECG (including ST segment, arrhythmia detection, ECG diagnostic analysis and measurement), invasive blood pressure, heart/pulse rate, oscillometric non-invasive blood pressure (systolic, diastolic and mean arterial pressure), functional oxygen saturation (SpO2) and pulse rate via continuous monitoring (including monitoring during conditions of clinical patient motion or low perfusion), temperature with a reusable or disposable electronic thermometer for continual monitoring Esophageal/Nasopharyngeal/Tympanic/Rectal/Bladder/Axillary/Skin/Airway/Room/Myocardial/Core/Surface temperature, impedance respiration, respiration rate, airway gases (CO2, O2, N2O, anesthetic agents, anesthetic agent identification and respiratory rate), Cardiac Output (C.O.), Entropy, neuromuscular transmission (NMT) and Bispectral Index (BIS).

The monitor B105M, B125M, B155M, B105P and B125P are able to detect and generate alarms for ECG arrhythmias: Asystole, Ventricular tachycardia, VT>2, Ventricular Bradycardia, Accelerated Ventricular Rhythm, Ventricular Couplet, Bigeminy, Trigeminy, "R on T", Tachycardia, Bradycardia, Pause, Atrial Fibrillation, Irregular, Multifocal PVCs, Missing Beat, SV Tachy, Premature Ventricular Contraction (PVC), Supra Ventricular Contraction (SVC) and Ventricular fibrillation.

The proposed monitors B105M, B125M, B155M, B105P and B125P are new version of multi-parameter patient monitors developed based on the predicate monitors B105M, B125M, B155M, B105P and B125P (K213490) to provide additional monitored parameter Bispectral Index (BIS) by supporting the additional optional E-BIS module (K052145) which used in conjunction with Covidien BISx module (K072286).

In addition to the added parameter, the proposed monitors also offer below several enhancements:

• Provided data connection with GE HealthCare anesthesia devices to display the parameters measured from anesthesia devices (Applicable for B105M, B125M and B155M).
• Modified Early Warning Score calculation provided.
• Separated low priority alarms user configurable settings from the combined High/Medium/Low priority options.
• Provided additional customized notification tool to allow clinician to configure the specific notification condition of one or more physiological parameters measured by the monitor. (Applicable for B105M, B125M and B155M).
• Enhanced User Interface in Neuromuscular Transmission (NMT), Respiration Rate and alarm overview.
• Provided Venous Stasis to assist venous catheterization with NIBP cuff inflation.
• Supported alarm light brightness adjustment.
• Supported alarm audio pause by gesture (Not applicable for B105M and B105P).
• Supported automatic screen brightness adjustment.
• Supported network laser printing.
• Continuous improvements in cybersecurity

The proposed monitors B105M, B125M, B155M, B105P and B125P retain equivalent hardware design based on the predicate monitors and removal of the device Trim-knob to better support cleaning and disinfecting while maintaining the same primary function and operation.

Same as the predicate device, the five models (B105M, B125M, B155M, B105P and B125P) share the same hardware platform and software platform to support the data acquisition and algorithm modules. The differences between them are the LCD screen size and configuration options. There is no change from the predicate in the display size.

As with the predicate monitors B105M, B125M, B155M, B105P and B125P (K213490), the proposed monitors B105M, B125M, B155M, B105P and B125P are multi-parameter patient monitors, utilizing an LCD display and pre-configuration basic parameters: ECG, RESP, NIBP, IBP, TEMP, SpO2, and optional parameters which include CO2 and Gas parameters provided by the E-MiniC module (K052582), CARESCAPE Respiratory modules E-sCO and E-sCAiO (K171028), Airway Gas Option module N-CAiO (K151063), Entropy parameter provided by the E-Entropy module (K150298), Cardiac Output parameter provided by the E-COP module (K052976), Neuromuscular Transmission (NMT) parameter provided by E-NMT module (K051635) and thermal recorder B1X5-REC.

The proposed monitors B105M, B125M, B155M, B105P and B125P are not Apnea monitors (i.e., do not rely on the device for detection or alarm for the cessation of breathing). These devices should not be used for life sustaining/supporting purposes. Do not attempt to use these devices to detect sleep apnea.

As with the predicate monitors B105M, B125M, B155M, B105P and B125P (K213490), the proposed monitors B105M, B125M, B155M, B105P and B125P also can interface with a variety of existing central station systems via a cabled or wireless network which implemented with identical integrated WiFi module. (WiFi feature is disabled in B125P/B105P).

Moreover, same as the predicate monitors B105M, B125M, B155M, B105P and B125P (K213490), the proposed monitors B105M, B125M, B155M, B105P and B125P include features and subsystems that are optional or configurable, and it can be mounted in a variety of ways (e.g., shelf, countertop, table, wall, pole, or head/foot board) using existing mounting accessories.

The provided FDA 510(k) clearance letter and summary for K242562 (Monitor B105M, Monitor B125M, Monitor B155M, Monitor B105P, Monitor B125P) do not contain information about specific acceptance criteria, reported device performance metrics, or details of a study meeting those criteria for any of the listed physiological parameters or functionalities (e.g., ECG or arrhythmia detection).

Instead, the documentation primarily focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence to a predicate device (K213490) by comparing features, technology, and compliance with various recognized standards and guidance documents for safety, EMC, software, human factors, and cybersecurity.

The summary explicitly states: "The subject of this premarket submission, the proposed monitors B105M/B125M/B155M/B105P/B125P did not require clinical studies to support substantial equivalence." This implies that the changes introduced in the new device versions were not considered significant enough to warrant new clinical performance studies or specific quantitative efficacy/accuracy acceptance criteria beyond what is covered by the referenced consensus standards.

Therefore, I cannot provide the requested information from the given text:

1. A table of acceptance criteria and the reported device performance: This information is not present. The document lists numerous standards and tests performed, but not specific performance metrics or acceptance thresholds.
2. Sample size used for the test set and the data provenance: Not explicitly stated for performance evaluation, as clinical studies were not required. The usability testing mentioned a sample size of 16 US clinical users, but this is for human factors, not device performance.
3. Number of experts used to establish the ground truth for the test set and the qualifications of those experts: Not applicable, as detailed performance studies requiring expert ground truth are not described.
4. Adjudication method (e.g. 2+1, 3+1, none) for the test set: Not applicable.
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 device is a patient monitor, not an AI-assisted diagnostic tool that would typically involve human readers.
6. If a standalone (i.e. algorithm only without human-in-the loop performance) was done: The document describes "Bench testing related to software, hardware and performance including applicable consensus standards," which implies standalone testing against known specifications or simulated data. However, specific results or detailed methodologies for this type of testing are not provided beyond the list of standards.
7. The type of ground truth used (expert consensus, pathology, outcomes data, etc.): Not explicitly stated for performance assessment. For the various parameters (ECG, NIBP, SpO2, etc.), it would typically involve reference equipment or validated methods as per the relevant IEC/ISO standards mentioned.
8. The sample size for the training set: Not applicable, as this is not an AI/ML device that would require explicit training data in the context of this submission.
9. How the ground truth for the training set was established: Not applicable.

In summary, the provided document focuses on demonstrating that the new monitors are substantially equivalent to their predicate through feature comparison, adherence to recognized standards, and various non-clinical bench tests (e.g., hardware, alarms, EMC, environmental, reprocessing, human factors, software, cybersecurity). It does not contain the detailed performance study results and acceptance criteria typically found for novel diagnostic algorithms or AI-driven devices.

Ask a specific question about this device

The iX series Patient Monitors including iX10, iX12, iX15 are intended to be used for monitoring, storing, and reviewing of, and to generate alarms for, multiple physiological parameters of adults and pediatics (including neonates). The monitors are intended for use by trained healthcare professionals in hospital environments.

The monitored physiological parameters include: ECG, respiration (RESP), temperature (TEMP), functional oxygen saturation of arterial hemoglobin (SpO2), pulse rate (PR), non-invasive blood pressure (NIBP), invasive blood pressure (IBP), carbon dioxide (CO2), cardiac output (C.O.), and Anaesthesia gas (AG).

The arrhythmia detection and ST Segment analysis are intended for adult patients.

The NIBP monitoring supports iCUFS algorithm and iFAST algorithm is intended for adult, pediatric and neonatal patients. The iFAST algorithm is intended for adult and pediatic patients (≥3 years of age). Both measurement algorithms are also intended for use with pregnant women, including pre-eclamptic patients. NIBP MAP is not applicable to pregnant women.

The Spot Temp with T2A module can only measure temperature of adult and pediatric (> 1 year of age) patients. The monitors are not intended for MRI environments.

The cardiac output (C.O.) is only intended for adult patients.

The iX series Patient Monitors including iX10, iX12, iX15 can perform long-time continuous monitoring of multiple physiological parameters. Also, it is capable of storing, displaying, analyzing and controlling measurements, and it will indicate alarms in case of abnormalities so that doctors and nurses can respond to the patient's situation as appropriate.

This document describes the premarket notification (510(k)) for the Edan Instruments, Inc. Patient Monitor (iX10, iX12, iX15) and its equivalence to a predicate device.

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

The acceptance criteria for the new device were generally established by compliance with various international standards for medical electrical equipment and specific performance characteristics. The reported device performance indicates that the device meets these standards and its specified accuracy.

For the Quick Temp Module (T2A), the provided text details specific clinical study results. Other parameters were tested for compliance with relevant standards through non-clinical testing.

2. Sample Size for Test Set and Data Provenance

For the Quick Temp Module (T2A) Predict Mode clinical accuracy study:

• Sample Size: 142 valid cases for sublingual and axillary temperature measurements.
• Data Provenance: Clinical investigation (prospective study). No country of origin is explicitly stated, but the company is based in China.

For other parameters, specific sample sizes for non-clinical (bench) testing are not provided, but the document states "Edan has conducted functional and system level testing to validate the performance of the results of the bench testing show that the subject device meets its accuracy specification and meet relevant consensus standards."

3. Number of Experts and their Qualifications for Ground Truth

The document does not specify the number or qualifications of experts used to establish ground truth for the clinical study of the Quick Temp Module (T2A). It only mentions that the study compared the new module against the "direct mode of F3000 Temp Module of M3A Vital signs monitor," implying the predicate device served as a reference for accuracy.

For other non-clinical tests, the ground truth is implicitly defined by the specifications and performance requirements outlined in the referenced international standards.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set

The document does not describe a specific adjudication method (e.g., 2+1, 3+1) for the clinical study or any other test sets.

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

No multi-reader multi-case (MRMC) comparative effectiveness study is mentioned in the provided text. The device is a patient monitor, and its performance evaluation typically focuses on the accuracy and reliability of its physiological parameter measurements, not on improving human reader performance with AI assistance.

6. Standalone (Algorithm Only) Performance Study

Yes, standalone performance was evaluated for the components of the device. The non-clinical data section describes extensive functional and system-level testing to validate the performance against relevant consensus standards. This includes specific tests for algorithms like cardiac rhythm and ST segment measurement. The clinical study for the Quick Temp Module (T2A) also assesses the standalone performance of that specific module.

7. Type of Ground Truth Used

• For the Quick Temp Module (T2A) clinical study: The ground truth was established by comparison to a reference device's direct temperature measurement mode ("direct mode of F3000 Temp Module of M3A Vital signs monitor"). This is a form of reference standard comparison (using a predicate device as the reference).
• For other parameters (e.g., ECG, NIBP, SpO2, CO2, AG): The ground truth for non-clinical testing is implicitly based on the specifications and performance requirements outlined in the referenced international consensus standards (e.g., IEC 60601 series, ISO 80601 series, AAMI standards).

8. Sample Size for the Training Set

The document does not provide information about a training set since this is a patient monitoring device and not a machine learning algorithm as typically understood in the context of large-scale image-based diagnostics. The "algorithms" mentioned (e.g., arrhythmia detection, NIBP algorithms) are likely engineered signal processing algorithms rather than deep learning models requiring large training datasets.

9. How Ground Truth for Training Set was Established

Not applicable, as no training set for a machine learning model is described in the provided text. The algorithms for the patient monitor's functions are developed and validated against established physiological principles and engineering standards.

Ask a specific question about this device

Indications for Use for CARESCAPE Canvas 1000:

CARESCAPE Canvas 1000 is a multi-parameter patient monitor intended for use in multiple areas within a professional healthcare facility.

CARESCAPE Canvas 1000 is intended for use on adult, pediatric, and neonatal patients one patient at a time.

CARESCAPE Canvas 1000 is indicated for monitoring of:

· hemodynamic (including ECG, ST segment, arrhythmia detection, ECG diagnostic analysis and measurement, invasive pressure, non-invasive blood pressure, pulse oximetry, regional oxygen saturation, total hemoglobin concentration, cardiac output (thermodilution and pulse contour), temperature, mixed venous oxygen saturation, and central venous oxygen saturation),

· respiratory (impedance respiration, airway gases (CO2, O2, N2O, and anesthetic agents), spirometry, gas exchange), and

· neurophysiological status (including electroencephalography, Entropy, Bispectral Index (BIS), and neuromuscular transmission).

CARESCAPE Canvas 1000 is able to detect and generate alarms for ECG arrhythmias: atrial fibrillation, accelerated ventricular rhythm, asystole, bigeminy, bradycardia, ventricular couplet, irregular, missing beat, multifocal premature ventricular contractions (PVCs), pause, R on T, supra ventricular tachycardia, trigeminy, ventricular bradycardia, ventricular fibrillation/ ventricular tachycardia, ventricular tachycardia, and VT>2. CARESCAPE Canvas 1000 also shows alarms from other ECG sources.

CARESCAPE Canvas 1000 also provides other alarms, trends, snapshots and events, and calculations and can be connected to displays, printers and recording devices.

CARESCAPE Canvas 1000 can interface to other devices. It can also be connected to other monitors for remote viewing and to data management software devices via a network.

CARESCAPE Canvas 1000 is intended for use under the direct supervision of a licensed healthcare practitioner, or by personnel trained in proper use of the equipment in a professional healthcare facility.

CARESCAPE Canvas 1000 is not intended for use in an MRI environment.

Indications for Use for CARESCAPE Canvas Smart Display:

CARESCAPE Canvas Smart Display is a multi-parameter patient monitor intended for use in multiple areas within a professional healthcare facility.

CARESCAPE Canvas Smart Display is intended for use on adult, pediatric, and neonatal patients one patient at a time.

CARESCAPE Canvas Smart Display is indicated for monitoring of:

· hemodynamic (including ECG, ST segment, arrhythmia detection, ECG diagnostic analysis and measurement, invasive pressure, non-invasive blood pressure, pulse oximetry, regional oxygen saturation, total hemoglobin concentration, cardiac output (thermodilution), and temperature, and · respiratory (impedance respiration, airway gases (CO2)

CARESCAPE Canvas Smart Display is able to detect and generate alarms for ECG arrhythmias: atrial fibrillation, accelerated ventricular rhythm, asystole, bigeminy, bradycardia, ventricular couplet, irregular, missing beat, multifocal premature ventricular contractions (PVCs), pause, R on T, supra ventricular tachycardia, trigeminy, ventricular bradycardia, ventricular fibrillation/ ventricular tachycardia, ventricular tachycardia, and VT>2. CARESCAPE Canvas Smart Display also shows alarms from other ECG sources.

CARESCAPE Canvas Smart Display also provides other alarms, trends, snapshots and events. CARESCAPE Canvas Smart Display can use CARESCAPE ONE or CARESCAPE Patient Data Module (PDM) as patient data acquisition devices. It can also be connected to other monitors for remote viewing and to data management software devices via a network.

CARESCAPE Canvas Smart Display is intended for use under the direct supervision of a licensed healthcare practitioner, or by personnel trained in proper use of the equipment in a professional healthcare facility.

CARESCAPE Canvas Smart Display is not intended for use in an MRI environment.

Indications for Use for CARESCAPE Canvas D19:

CARESCAPE Canvas D19 is intended for use as a secondary display with a compatible host device. It is intended for displaying measurement and parametric data from the host device and providing visual and audible alarms generated by the host device.

CARESCAPE Canvas D19 enables controlling the host device, including starting and discharging a patient case, changing parametric measurement settings, changing alarm limits and disabling alarms.

Using CARESCAPE Canvas D19 with a compatible host device enables real-time multi-parameter patient monitoring and continuous evaluation of the patient's ventilation, oxygenation, hemodynamic, circulation, temperature, and neurophysiological status.

Indications for Use for F2 Frame; F2-01:

The F2 Frame, module frame with two slots, is intended to be used with compatible GE multiparameter patient monitors to interface with two single width parameter modules, CARESCAPE ONE with a slide mount, and recorder.

The F2 Frame is intended for use in multiple areas within a professional healthcare facility. The F2 Frame is intended for use under the direct supervision of a licensed healthcare practitioner, or by person trained in proper use of the equipment in a professional healthcare facility.

The F2 Frame is intended for use on adult, pediatric, and neonatal patients and on one patient at a time.

Hardware and software modifications carried out on the legally marketed predicate device CARESCAPE B850 V3.2, resulted in new products CARESCAPE Canvas 1000 and CARESCAPE Canvas Smart Display, along with the CARESCAPE Canvas D19 and F2 Frame (F2-01) all of which are the subject of this submission.

CARESCAPE Canvas 1000 and CARESCAPE Canvas Smart Display are new modular multi-parameter patient monitoring systems. In addition, the new devices CARESCAPE Canvas D19 and F2 Frame (F2-01) are a new secondary display and new module frame respectively.

The CARESCAPE Canvas 1000 and CARESCAPE Canvas Smart Display patient monitors incorporates a 19-inch display with a capacitive touch screen and the screen content is user-configurable. They have an integrated alarm light and USB connectivity for other user input devices. The user interface is touchscreen-based and can be used also with a mouse and a keyboard or a remote controller. The system also includes the medical application software (CARESCAPE Software version 3.3). The CARESCAPE Canvas 1000 and CARESCAPE Canvas Smart Display include features and subsystems that are optional or configurable.

The CARESCAPE Canvas 1000 and CARESCAPE Canvas Smart Display are compatible with the CARESCAPE Patient Data Module and CARESCAPE ONE acquisition device via F0 docking station (cleared separately).

For the CARESCAPE Canvas 1000 patient monitor, the other type of acquisition modules, E-modules (cleared separately) can be chosen based on care requirements and patient needs. Interfacing subsystems that can be used to connect the E-modules to the CARESCAPE Canvas 1000 include a new two-slot parameter module F2 frame (F2-01), a five-slot parameter module F5 frame (F5-01), and a seven-slot parameter module F7 frame (F7-01).

The CARESCAPE Canvas 1000 can also be used together with the new secondary CARESCAPE Canvas D19 display. The CARESCAPE Canvas D19 display provides a capacitive touch screen, and the screen content is user configurable. The CARESCAPE Canvas D19 display integrates audible and visual alarms and provides USB connectivity for other user input devices.

Please note that the provided text is a 510(k) summary for a medical device and primarily focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence to a predicate device through non-clinical bench testing and adherence to various standards. It explicitly states that clinical studies were not required to support substantial equivalence. Therefore, some of the requested information regarding clinical studies, human expert involvement, and ground truth establishment from patient data will likely not be present.

Based on the provided text, here's the information regarding acceptance criteria and device performance:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

The document does not present a formal table of specific, quantifiable acceptance criteria alongside reported performance data. Instead, it states that various tests were conducted to demonstrate that the design meets specifications and complies with consensus standards. The performance is generally reported as "meets the specifications," "meets the EMC requirements," "meets the electrical safety requirements," and "fulfilled through compliance."

However, we can infer some "acceptance criteria" based on the standards and tests mentioned:

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

• Test Set Sample Size: The document implies that the "test set" for performance evaluation was the device itself and its components as described ("CARESCAPE Canvas 1000, CARESCAPE Canvas Smart Display, CARESCAPE Canvas D19 and F2 Frame (F2-01)").
  • For usability testing, "16 US Clinical, 16 US Technical and 15 US Cleaning users" were involved.
• Data Provenance: The testing described is non-clinical bench testing.
  • For usability testing, the users were located in the US.
  • No direct patient data or retrospective/prospective study data is mentioned beyond the device's inherent functional characteristics being tested according to standards.

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

• Number of Experts: Not applicable in the context of establishing "ground truth" for patient data, as no clinical studies with patient data requiring expert adjudication were conducted or reported to establish substantial equivalence.
• For usability testing, "16 US Clinical, 16 US Technical and 15 US Cleaning users" participated. Their specific qualifications (e.g., years of experience, types of healthcare professionals) are not detailed in this summary.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set

• Not applicable, as no clinical studies with patient data requiring adjudication were conducted or reported.

5. If a Multi-Reader Multi-Case (MRMC) Comparative Effectiveness Study Was Done, and the Effect Size of How Much Human Readers Improve with AI vs. Without AI Assistance

• No MRMC study was done, as the document explicitly states: "The subjects of this premarket submission... did not require clinical studies to support substantial equivalence." The device is a patient monitor, not an AI-assisted diagnostic tool for image interpretation or similar.

6. If a Standalone (i.e., algorithm only without human-in-the-loop performance) Was Done

• The performance evaluations mentioned (e.g., for general device functionality, electrical safety, EMC, specific parameter measurements like ECG/arrhythmia detection) represent the device's standalone performance in a bench setting, demonstrating its adherence to established standards and specifications. There is no separate "algorithm only" performance study reported distinctly from integrated device testing. The EK-Pro V14 algorithm, which is part of the device, is noted as "identical" to the predicate, implying its performance characteristics are maintained.

7. The Type of Ground Truth Used

• For the non-clinical bench testing, the "ground truth" was established by conformance to internationally recognized performance and safety standards (e.g., IEC, ISO, AAMI/ANSI) and the engineering specifications of the device/predicate. These standards define the acceptable range of performance for various parameters.
• For usability testing, the "ground truth" was the successful completion of tasks and overall user feedback/satisfaction as assessed by human factors evaluation methods.
• No ground truth from expert consensus on patient data, pathology, or outcomes data was used, as clinical studies were not required.

8. The Sample Size for the Training Set

• Not applicable. This document describes a 510(k) submission for a patient monitor, not a machine learning or AI model trained on a dataset. The device contains "Platform Software that has been updated from version 3.2 to version 3.3," but this refers to traditional software development and not a machine learning model requiring a "training set" in the AI sense.

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

• Not applicable, as there is no mention of a "training set" in the context of machine learning. The software development likely followed conventional software engineering practices, with ground truth established through design specifications, requirements, and verification/validation testing.

Ask a specific question about this device

The NC10 and NC12 patient monitors are intended to be used for monitoring, displaying, alarming and storing of multiple physiological parameters These parameters include ECG (3-lead or 12-lead selectable, arrhythmia detection, heart rate (HR)), Respiration rate (RR), temperature (Temp), SpO2, pulse rate (PR), non-invasive blood pressure (NIBP), invasive blood pressure (IBP), cardiac output (C.O.), carbon dioxide (CO2), anesthetic gas (AG), and Bispectral index (BIS) for a single patient.

All parameters can be monitored on single adult, pediatric, and neonatal patients except:

• · BIS monitoring is intended for adult and pediatric patients only;
• · C.O. monitoring is restricted to adult patients only;
  · Arrhythmia analysis is intended to use on adult patients only and is not intended and shall not be used on pediatric and neonatal population.
• · When using COMEM SpO2, the monitor is intended to be used on adult patients only.
• · NIBP measurement continual mode is not applicable to neonates.

The monitors are to be used in general healthes by clinical physicians or appropriate medical staff under the direction of physicians.

The monitors are not intended for helicopter transport, hospital ambulance, or home use.

The monitors do not measure, display, or trend changes in the ST segment.

The monitors do not intend for use as apnea monitors.

The monitors are not intended for use in MRI or CT environments.

The monitors are not used on patients who have a demonstrated need for cardiac monitoring known arrhythmias of VT, Accelerated Idioventricular rhythm and Torsades de Pointes.

The NC10 and NC12 patient monitors are intended to be used for monitoring, displaying, reviewing, alarming and storing multiple physiological parameters. These parameters include ECG (3-lead, 5-lead or 12-lead selectable, arrhythmia detection, heart rate (HR)), Respiration rate (RR), temperature (Temp), SpO2, pulse rate (PR), non-invasive blood pressure (NIBP), invasive blood pressure (IBP), cardiac output (C.O.), carbon dioxide (CO2), anesthetic gas (AG), and Bispectral index (BIS) for a single patient.
All parameters can be monitored on single adult, pediatric, and neonatal patients except:
BIS monitoring is intended for adult patients only; C.O. monitoring is restricted to adult patients only; Arrhythmia analysis is intended for use with adult patients only and is not intended and shall not be used on pediatric and neonatal population. When using COMEM SpO2, the monitor is intended to be used on adult patients only. NIBP measurement continual mode is not applicable to neonates. Both models are designed with:
Same system framework and components
Same hardware design principle
Same software platform
Same parameters measurement subsystems (including parameters modules and accessories)
The only difference between NC10 and NC12 is the display size.

The acceptance criteria and supporting study details for the Multi-Parameter Patient Monitor (NC10 and NC12) are provided below, based on the given FDA 510(k) summary.

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

The document does not explicitly present specific "acceptance criteria" for each physiological parameter in a tabular format with corresponding "reported device performance." Instead, it compares the subject device's specifications to those of the predicate device, stating that the subject device's performance aligns with or is a subset of the predicate's performance, and that the device meets relevant consensus standards. The "Comparison" column in the provided tables indicates "Same" for most parameters, implying that the subject device's performance is equivalent to the established performance of the predicate device. For the "Comen SpO2" feature, where there's a difference, the document states, "The SpO2 accuracy met ISO 80601-2-61 and was validated by the clinical study," indicating that its performance meets the standard.

Here's a condensed representation of the key performance specifications for the subject device (NC10 and NC12), which also serve as implied acceptance criteria given the "Same" comparison to the predicate:

The document implies that the "reported device performance" for the subject device meets or is equivalent to these specified ranges and accuracies through bench testing and clinical studies, confirming compliance with relevant standards.

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

• Sample Size for Test Set: The document does not specify exact numerical sample sizes for each clinical test. It mentions that clinical accuracy of NIBP, SpO2, and respiratory rate were validated for the intended patient population.
  • For SpO2 accuracy, it states the validation was done "using the method outlined in ISO 80601-2-61:2017 and the FDA guidance Pulse Oximeters - Premarket Notification Submissions [510(k)s]: Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff, March 2013." These standards typically require a certain number of subjects (often healthy volunteers) with induced hypoxemia for desaturation studies to demonstrate accuracy across the specified range. However, the exact number is not provided in this summary.
  • For NIBP accuracy, it states validation was "according to ISO 81060-2 which contains the requirements for clinical accuracy and the protocols for investigating the NIBP determination clinical accuracy." This standard also prescribes specific subject enrollment criteria and measurement methods.
  • For Respiratory Rate (RR) accuracy, it was validated "by clinical testing to compare the measurement of the subject device and that of a clinician-scored capnography device, manually scored end-tidal CO2 (EtCO2) capnography." The sample size for this is not detailed.
• Data Provenance: The document does not explicitly state the country of origin of the data. It also does not explicitly state whether the studies were retrospective or prospective, though clinical validation studies for device clearance are typically prospective. It does say "All clinical accuracy validation studies were conducted in accordance with standard ISO 14155:2020," which governs clinical investigation of medical devices, generally implying prospective collection.

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

The document does not provide details on the number or qualifications of experts used for establishing ground truth, as it is a multi-parameter patient monitor.

• For SpO2, the ground truth would typically be established by a CO-oximeter reading during a controlled desaturation study, as per ISO 80601-2-61. This is a highly objective measurement.
• For NIBP, ground truth is typically established by direct intra-arterial blood pressure measurements, not by expert consensus.
• For Respiratory Rate, the ground truth was "clinician-scored capnography device, manually scored end-tidal CO2 (EtCO2) capnography." This implies clinically trained personnel, but their specific qualifications or number are not provided.
• For Arrhythmia Analysis, and other subjective physiological monitoring parameters, the ground truth source is not explicitly mentioned but typically relies on expert interpretation of ECG waveforms or other data.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set

The document does not detail any adjudication methods (e.g., 2+1, 3+1) for the test set, as most of the parameters are quantitative measurements compared against an objective reference standard rather than subjective interpretations requiring adjudication.

5. If a Multi-Reader Multi-Case (MRMC) Comparative Effectiveness Study was done

This document describes a multi-parameter patient monitor, which is a measurement device, not an AI-assisted diagnostic imaging tool. Therefore, an MRMC comparative effectiveness study comparing human readers with and without AI assistance is not applicable to this type of device and was not conducted. The study aims to demonstrate that the device's measurements are accurate and equivalent to predicate devices, not to show an improvement in human reader performance.

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

The entire device, including its algorithms for parameter measurement and arrhythmia detection, operates in a "standalone" fashion to generate the values and alarms displayed to the clinician. The performance validated (e.g., accuracy of SpO2, NIBP, RR, arrhythmia detection) is the inherent performance of the device's algorithms and hardware. While a human uses the device and interprets its output, the core measurements are algorithm-driven.

7. The Type of Ground Truth Used

• SpO2: CO-oximetry in a controlled desaturation study (objective, gold-standard reference for SpO2 saturation).
• NIBP: Direct intra-arterial blood pressure measurements (objective, gold-standard).
• Respiratory Rate: Clinician-scored capnography device, manually scored end-tidal CO2 (EtCO2) capnography. (This suggests an expert-derived observation from an objective measurement, or comparison to another well-established measurement device).
• ECG/Arrhythmia Detection and other parameters: The document implies comparison to established methods and compliance with relevant ISO standards, which would typically involve highly accurate reference measurements and possibly expert review of waveforms for specific event detection.

8. The Sample Size for the Training Set

The document does not provide information about a training set or its sample size. This is common for device clearances that focus on performance validation rather than machine learning algorithm development where distinct training and test sets are crucial. The device's algorithms are likely based on established physiological principles and signal processing, rather than deep learning from a massive training dataset.

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

As no specific training set is mentioned in the filing summary for this device, information regarding the establishment of its ground truth is not applicable or provided. The device's performance is demonstrated through its adherence to established international standards and clinical testing against reference methods.

Ask a specific question about this device

The monitors are intended to be used for monitoring, storing, and to generate alarms for, multiple physiological parameters of adults and pediatrics. The monitors are intended for use by trained healthcare professionals in hospital environments.

The LM-8 monitor monitors parameters such as ECG (3-lead, 12-lead selectable), Respiration (RESP), Functional arterial oxygen saturation (SpO2), Invasive or noninvasive blood pressure (dual-IBP, NIBP), Temperature (dual-TEMP), Expired CO2 and Quick Temperature (Quick TEMP).

The LM-10 monitor monitors parameters such as ECG (3-lead, 12-lead selectable), Respiration (RESP), Functional arterial oxygen saturation (SpO2), Invasive or noninvasive blood pressure (2/4 channels IBP, NIBP), Cardiac Output (C.O.), Temperature (dual-TEMP) and Expired CO2.

The LM-12 monitor monitors parameters such as ECG (3-lead, 12-lead selectable), Respiration (RESP), Functional arterial oxygen saturation (SpO2), Invasive or noninvasive blood pressure (2/4 chamels IBP, NIBP), Cardiac Output (C.O.), Temperature (dual-TEMP), Expired CO2 and Anesthetic gas (AG).

The LM-15 monitors parameters such as ECG (3-lead, 5-lead, 12-lead selectable), Respiration (RESP), Functional arterial oxygen saturation (SpO2), Invasive or noninvasive blood pressure (2/4 channels IBP, NIBP), Cardiac Output (C.O.), Temperature (dual-TEMP), Expired CO2 and Anesthetic gas (AG).

The arrhythmia detection and ST Segment analysis are intended for adult and pediatric patients.

The monitors are not intended for MRI environments.

LM-8, LM-10, LM-12 and LM-15, patient monitor integrates parameter measuring modules, display and recorder in one device, featuring in compactness, lightweight and portability. Replaceable built-in battery facilitates patient transport. Large high-resolution display provides clear view of 10 waveforms and full monitoring parameters. Patient Monitor can monitor vital signal such as ECG, respiration (RESP), non-invasive blood pressure (NIBP), oxygen saturation of the blood (SpO2), temperature (TEMP), invasive blood pressure (IBP), cardiac output (C.O.), CO2 and anesthetic gas (AG). Those signals are digitized, processed and examined for alarm conditions, after that presents all those information on the color TFT display. The monitor also provides advantageous operating control for the user.

The provided text is an FDA 510(k) summary for a Patient Monitor (models LM-8, LM-10, LM-12, LM-15). It primarily focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence to predicate devices through technical comparisons and compliance with general performance standards.

However, the document does not contain the detailed information necessary to answer all aspects of your request regarding acceptance criteria and a study proving the device meets those criteria in the context of an AI/algorithm-driven medical device performance study.

Specifically, the document lacks:

• A explicit table of acceptance criteria for algorithm performance (e.g., sensitivity, specificity, F1-score for arrhythmia detection).
• Detailed results of a study demonstrating the device meets specific performance criteria for arrhythmia detection or ST-segment analysis (beyond basic functional checks).
• Information on sample size for test sets directly related to algorithm performance (as opposed to overall device safety/functionality).
• Data provenance, number of experts for ground truth, adjudication methods, or MRMC studies, which are typical for AI/ML device evaluations.
• Training set details for any AI/ML components.

The "Performance data" section refers to "Clinical data" for validation, but these appear to be general functional validation tests on physiological parameters (ECG, RESP, SpO2, NIBP, etc.) to ensure the monitors function as intended, rather than a specific study to validate the performance of the arrhythmia detection and ST Segment analysis algorithm against clinical ground truth. The statement "The clinical data demonstrate that the subject devices perform comparably to the predicate device that is currently marketed for the same intended use" is a high-level conclusion without supporting details beyond the comparative features table.

Based on the provided text, here's what can be extracted and what is missing:

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

The document doesn't provide a specific table of quantitative acceptance criteria for the arrhythmia detection and ST segment analysis algorithm (e.g., sensitivity, specificity thresholds) and corresponding reported performance metrics. It lists general parameters and their measurement ranges, which are functional specifications, not performance criteria for an arrhythmia detection algorithm.

General device functional specifications (from comparison table, not acceptance criteria for algorithm):

The document notes that "The arrhythmia detection and ST Segment analysis are intended for adult and pediatric patients" and that "Clinical tests were performed on the LM-8, LM-12 and LM-15 monitors to validate their performance in terms of ECG...". However, it does not specify what constituted "validation" for these particular algorithmic features or what the performance metrics were. The "Conclusion" states: "The clinical data demonstrate that the subject devices perform comparably to the predicate device that is currently marketed for the same intended use." This is the reported device performance for these features: "comparable to predicate."

2. Sample sized used for the test set and the data provenance:

• Sample Size for Test Set: Not specified for the "Clinical data" related to ECG/arrhythmia/ST validation. The statement is general: "Clinical tests were performed on the LM-8, LM-12 and LM-15 monitors..."
• Data Provenance: Not specified (e.g., country of origin, retrospective or prospective).

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):

• Not specified. The document does not describe how ground truth for arrhythmia or ST segment analysis was established for clinical testing.

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

• Not specified.

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:

• No, an MRMC study is not mentioned. This device is a monitor, not an AI-assisted diagnostic tool for interpretation by a human reader in the typical sense of an MRMC study for imaging. It provides "arrhythmia detection and ST Segment analysis" algorithms directly to the user.

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

• The "Clinical data" statement indicates the monitors' performance was validated. Given the nature of a patient monitor, the arrhythmia and ST segment analysis would inherently be "standalone" algorithmic functions integrated into the device, providing automated analysis. However, specific performance metrics (like sensitivity/specificity of the algorithm itself) from this standalone evaluation are not presented.

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

• Not specified. It is generally implied that such devices are validated against accepted physiological measurement standards and potentially manually confirmed ECG interpretations, but the document does not detail this for the arrhythmia/ST segment analysis.

8. The sample size for the training set:

• Not applicable/Not specified. The document does not indicate that the arrhythmia detection or ST segment analysis algorithms utilize machine learning or require a "training set" in the sense of AI/ML development. It's likely these are based on established rule-based or signal processing algorithms, not learned from data.

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

• Not applicable. (See #8)

In summary, this 510(k) submission successfully demonstrates substantial equivalence through technical specifications, comparisons to predicate devices, and compliance with general safety and performance standards (e.g., electrical safety, EMC, biocompatibility, software verification/validation). However, it does not detail a specific performance study for its arrhythmia detection and ST segment analysis algorithms in a way that typically applies to AI/ML clearance, which would include explicit acceptance criteria, detailed test set characteristics, and ground truth methodologies. The "clinical data" section is very high-level and only states comparability to predicate devices.

Ask a specific question about this device

The monitors are intended to be used for monitoring, storing, and to generate alarms for, multiple physiological parameters of adults, pediatrics and neonates. The monitors are intended for use by trained healthcare professionals in hospital environments.

The monitored physiological parameters include: ECG, respiration (RESP), temperature (TEMP), oxygen saturation of arterial blood (SpO2), pulse rate (PR), non-invasive blood pressure (NIBP), invasive blood pressure (IBP), carbon dioxide (CO2), cardiac output (C.O.), anesthetic gas (AG), bispectral index (BIS), respiration mechanice cardiography (ICG).

BIS is intended for use on adult and pediatric patients.

ICG monitoring is intended for use on adults only.

The arrhythmia detection and ST Segment analysis are intended for adult patients.

The monitors are additionally intended for use during patient transport inside hospitals.

The monitors are not intended for MRI environments.

LMPLUS series Patient Monitor including LMPLUS-12, LMPLUS-15 and LMPLUS-17 which can perform long-time continuous monitoring of multiple physiological parameters. Also, it is capable of storing, displaying, analyzing and controlling measurements, and it will indicate alarms in case of abnormity so that doctors and nurses can deal with them in time.

The LMPLUS series Patient Monitor realize the monitoring of physiological parameters by configuration with different parameter modules which include SpO2 (pulse oxygen saturation, pulse rate and SpO2 plethysmogram) with EDAN SpO2 module or Nellcor SPO2 module, NIBP (systolic pressure, diastolic pressure and pulse rate), TEMP, ECG, RESP (respiration), CO2, IBP, C.O. and AG (anesthetic gas), RM (respiratory mechanics), BIS (bispectral index) and ICG (impedance cardiography).

The above is the maximum configuration for LMPLUS series Patient Monitor, the user may select different monitoring parameters in according with their requirements.

LMPLUS-12 configures with 12.1-inch color TFT touch screen, LMPLUS-15 and LMPLUS-17 with same screen except different sizes 15-inch and 17-inch separately. Three models are all build-in Lithium-ion battery, support software upgrade online and networking.

The provided document focuses on the 510(k) summary for the CAF Medical Solutions Inc. Patient Monitor (models LMPLUS-12, LMPLUS-15, and LMPLUS-17), demonstrating its substantial equivalence to a predicate device (Edan Instruments, Inc. Patient Monitor, models elite V5, elite V6, and elite V8). The document primarily presents a feature-by-feature comparison and non-clinical performance data, with a brief mention of clinical tests.

Therefore, the information regarding acceptance criteria and the study proving the device meets them will be limited to what is explicitly stated in the document or can be inferred from the provided test types and standards. A full, detailed study proving acceptance criteria for specific performance metrics (like sensitivity, specificity, or inter-reader variability for an AI model) is not present in this type of regulatory submission document, which focuses on substantial equivalence to a predicate rather than a novel AI algorithm.

Based on the provided document, here's what can be extracted and inferred regarding performance and validation:

The document indicates that the device's performance was evaluated against various recognized standards for patient monitors, which inherently define acceptable performance ranges for each physiological parameter. The study primarily aims to show that the new device meets these established standards and performs comparably to the predicate device.

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

The document does not explicitly present a "table of acceptance criteria" in the format of a pre-defined threshold that the device must meet for a specific study's outcome (e.g., "sensitivity > X%"). Instead, it shows a feature-by-feature comparison to a predicate device, including various performance specifications (e.g., accuracy, measurement range) that are in line with industry standards for patient monitors. The "Acceptance Criteria" are implicitly defined by the parameters and accuracy/range specifications of the predicate device and the relevant IEC/ISO standards the device claims compliance with. The "Reported Device Performance" for the subject device (LMPLUS models) is stated to be "Same" as the predicate device across all listed specifications.

Here's an illustrative table based on the provided comparison, highlighting key physiological parameters:

Note: The table above is a summary of just a few representative parameters from the much larger comparison table (Table 1) in the document. The general "Acceptance Criteria" for all listed parameters are the identical specifications of the predicate device.

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

The document states: "Clinical tests were performed on the LMPLUS 12, LMPLUS 15 and LMPLUS 17 monitors to validate their performance in terms of noninvasive blood pressure (NIBP) and SpO2 accuracy."

However, the specific sample sizes for these clinical tests (number of patients, number of measurements) and the data provenance (e.g., country of origin, retrospective or prospective nature) are not detailed in this 510(k) summary. This level of detail would typically be found in the full test report, which is referenced but not included.

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

The document mentions "clinical tests" for NIBP and SpO2 accuracy. For these types of physiological measurements, the ground truth is typically established by:

• Reference Devices: Using highly accurate, calibrated reference measurement devices.
• Clinical Protocols: Adhering to established clinical protocols for data collection (e.g., for NIBP, a protocol like ISO 81060-2 which often involves comparisons to invasive arterial measurements or calibrated sphygmomanometers by trained healthcare professionals).

There is no mention of human experts being used to establish "ground truth" in the context of interpretation (e.g., radiologists for imaging, unlike an AI algorithm for image analysis). The device measures physiological parameters, and accuracy is validated against established, objective measurement techniques, not expert consensus on qualitative data. Therefore, the concept of "experts establishing ground truth" as it applies to subjective judgments or interpretations (which is common for AI/ML in imaging) is not directly applicable here.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set

Given that the clinical tests mentioned are for quantitative physiological parameter accuracy (NIBP and SpO2), adjudication methods like 2+1 or 3+1 (common in studies involving multiple readers for subjective assessments) are not applicable. Accuracy is determined by comparing device readings to a reference standard, not by expert consensus on interpretations.

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

No MRMC study was mentioned or implied.
This device is a patient monitor, not an AI-assisted diagnostic tool that would involve human readers interpreting cases. Therefore, a study to measure how much human readers improve with AI assistance is not relevant to this type of device and was not performed.

6. Standalone Performance (Algorithm Only without Human-in-the-Loop)

The document does not describe the device as having a distinct "algorithm" component for analysis that would be evaluated in isolation. It's a physiological monitoring device. Its accuracy in measuring parameters like NIBP and SpO2 is its "standalone performance." The clinical tests mentioned (for NIBP and SpO2 accuracy) would indeed be an assessment of the device's ability to accurately measure these parameters independently, which is effectively its standalone performance. The results are implied by the statement "the subject devices perform comparably to the predicate device."

7. Type of Ground Truth Used

For the clinical tests (NIBP and SpO2 accuracy), the ground truth would be established through:

• Reference Standard Measurements: Using a highly accurate and validated reference device (e.g., an invasive arterial line for NIBP, or a co-oximeter for SpO2) or an established standardized method as per relevant ISO standards (e.g., ISO 81060-2 for NIBP).
• Physiological Data: Direct physiological measurements, not pathology, outcomes data, or expert consensus on subjective interpretations.

8. Sample Size for the Training Set

This document describes a conventional patient monitor, not a medical device that utilizes AI/ML requiring a distinct "training set" of data to learn from. Therefore, there is no mention of a training set or its sample size. The device's algorithms for processing physiological signals are based on established engineering principles and signal processing, not machine learning from a large training dataset.

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

As there is no training set for this type of device, this question is not applicable.

Ask a specific question about this device

The BeneVision N12N15/N17/N19/N22 patient monitors are intended for monitoring, displaying, storing, alarming, and transferring of multiple physiological parameters including ECG (3-lead, 5-lead or 12-lead selectable, Arrhythmia Detection, ST Segment Analysis, QT Analysis, and Heart Rate (HR)), Respiration Rate (Resp), Temperature (Temp), Pulse Oxygen Saturation (SpO2), Pulse Rate (PR), Non-invasive Blood Pressure (NIBP), Invasive Blood Pressure (IBP), Pulmonary Artery Wedge Pressure (PAWP), Cardiac Output (C.O.), Continuous Cardiac Output (CCO), Mixed/Central Venous Oxygen Saturation (SvO2/ScvO2), Carbon Dioxide (CO2), Oxygen (O2), Anesthetic Gas (AG), Impedance Cardiograph (ICG), Bispectral Index (BIS), Respiration Mechanics (RM), Neuromuscular Transmission Monitoring (NMT), Electroencephalograph (EEG), and Regional Oxygen Saturation (rSO2). The system also provides an interpretation of resting 12-lead ECG.

All the parameters can be monitored on single adult, pediatric, and neonatal patients except for the following:

• · BIS, RM, CCO, SvO2/ScvO2, PAWP, NMT monitoring, PNP, and PNC are intended for adult and pediatric patients only. CCO using FloTrac is intended for adult patients only;
• · C.O. monitoring and A-Fib are intended for adult patients only;
• · ICG monitoring is intended for only adult patients who meet the following requirements: height: 122 to 229cm, weight: 30 to 155kg.
• · rSO2 monitoring is intended for use in individuals greater than 2.5kg.

The monitors are to be used in healthcare facilities by clinical professionals or under their guidance. They should only be used by persons who have received adequate training in their use. The BeneVision N12/N15/N17/N19/N22 monitors are not intended for helicopter transport, hospital ambulance, or home use.

The BeneVision N1 Patient Monitor is intended for monitoring, reviewing, storing, alarming, and transferring of multiple physiological parameters including ECG (3-lead, 5-lead or 12-lead selectable, Arrhythmia Detection, ST Segment Analysis, and Heart Rate (HR)), Respiration (Resp), Temperature (Temp), Pulse Oxygen Saturation (SpO₂), Pulse Rate (PR), Non-invasive Blood Pressure (NIBP), Invasive Blood Pressure (IBP), Pulmonary Artery Wedge Pressure (PAWP), Carbon Dioxide (CO2) and Oxygen (O2). The system also provides an interpretation of resting 12-lead ECG.

All the parameters can be monitored on single adult, pediatric, and neonatal patients except for the following:

• PAWP, PNP, and PNC are intended for adult and pediatric patients only;
• A-Fib is intended for adult patients only;

The BeneVision N1 monitor is to be used in healthcare facilities. It can also be used during patient transport inside and outside of the hospital environment, whereas N1 configured with WMTS technology can be used inside the hospital only. It should be used by clinical professionals or under their guidance. It should only be used by persons who have received adequate training in its use. It is not intended for home use.

The subject BeneVision N Series Patient Monitors includes six monitors:

• . BeneVision N12 Patient Monitor
• BeneVision N15 Patient Monitor
• BeneVision N17 Patient Monitor ●
• BeneVision N19 Patient Monitor ●
• BeneVision N22 Patient Monitor ●
• BeneVision N1 Patient Monitor

Mindray's BeneVision N Series Patient Monitors provide a flexible software and hardware platform to meet the clinical needs of patient monitoring.

This document is a 510(k) Summary for the Mindray BeneVision N Series Patient Monitors, which focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence to a previously cleared predicate device (K202405).

The information provided primarily details the device's technical specifications and comparisons to a predicate device, rather than a full study proving the device meets acceptance criteria for a specific medical condition or AI diagnostic output.

Therefore, I cannot fully answer all parts of your request as the document does not contain the detailed clinical study results (like sample sizes for test sets, number of experts for ground truth, adjudication methods, MRMC studies, or specific AI performance metrics) that would typically be found for a device requiring those types of studies (e.g., an AI-powered diagnostic tool).

However, I can extract the relevant information regarding the device's functional and technical performance as demonstrated in this 510(k) submission.

Here's a breakdown of what can be inferred and what is missing:

Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

The "acceptance criteria" in this context are related to meeting the performance specifications of the predicate device and relevant consensus standards. The "reported device performance" is demonstrated through functional and system-level testing, ensuring the device meets its accuracy specifications for the various physiological parameters it monitors.

Table of "Acceptance Criteria" (Implied Specifications) and "Reported Device Performance" (Conformance):

Detailed Study Information (Based on Document Content):

1. Sample sizes used for the test set and the data provenance:

   • The document states that "functional and system level testing" and "bench testing" were conducted.
   • However, no specific sample sizes for test sets (e.g., number of patients, number of data recordings) are provided for any of the performance evaluations.
   • Data Provenance: Not explicitly stated (e.g., country of origin, retrospective/prospective). The tests described are generic "bench testing" to ensure compliance with technical specifications and standards, not clinical studies.

2. Number of experts used to establish the ground truth for the test set and the qualifications of those experts:

   • Not applicable / Not provided. This document describes engineering and bench testing against pre-defined technical specifications and industry standards for physiological measurement accuracy. It does not describe a clinical study involving human experts establishing ground truth for diagnostic interpretation (e.g., for an AI algorithm interpreting medical images).

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

   • Not applicable / Not provided. Same reason as above.

4. 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:

   • No. This device is a patient monitor. It detects physiological parameters and provides alarms, and some interpretations of ECG (e.g., 12-lead ECG interpretation, arrhythmia detection). It is not an AI-assisted diagnostic device in the sense of image interpretation for which MRMC studies are typically performed. The document details that "optimized auditory ALARM SIGNALS" and "alarm highlight" were added, suggesting improvements to the human-device interface, but not a formal MRMC study on diagnostic improvement.

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

   • The document implies that algorithms for ECG (Mindray or Mortara algorithm for arrhythmia and ST-segment analysis) are embedded in the device. The listed accuracy specifications for these measurements (e.g., HR, ST, QT) reflect the standalone performance of these measurement algorithms and sensors against established benchmarks. However, a formal "standalone study" with detailed methodology, distinct from the general bench testing, is not specifically described or provided with separate results. The performance data listed (e.g., accuracy for HR, ST, QT) serves as the "standalone" performance verification for these integrated functionalities.

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

   • For physiological measurements (ECG, SpO2, NIBP, etc.), the "ground truth" would typically refer to reference measurement devices or calibrated simulators used during bench testing to verify the accuracy of the monitor's readings against a known, accurate value.
   • For the ECG interpretation (e.g., 12-lead ECG interpretation, arrhythmia detection), the ground truth for the algorithms would have been established during their development and previous clearance processes (Mindray or Mortara algorithms). This document focuses on demonstrating that the integration and revised features maintain that established accuracy rather than re-proving the core algorithms.

7. The sample size for the training set:

   • Not provided. This document pertains to the 510(k) clearance of updates to an existing patient monitor series. It does not detail the development or training of new AI/ML algorithms, which would typically involve substantial training datasets. The ECG algorithms (Mindray or Mortara) were presumably "trained" (or developed and validated) previously as part of their initial predicate clearances.

8. How the ground truth for the training set was established:

   • Not provided. (See point 7). For existing algorithms like Mortara or Mindray ECG algorithms, ground truth for their original development would likely have been established using large, diverse ECG databases with expert cardiologist interpretations and/or correlation with clinical outcomes where relevant. This particular 510(k) document is concerned with demonstrating equivalence and continued performance with minor changes, not the original algorithm development.

Ask a specific question about this device

The CARESCAPE B650 is a multi-parameter patient monitor intended for use in multiple areas and intrahospital transport within a professional healthcare facility.

The CARESCAPE B650 is intended for use on adult, pediatric, and neonatal patients and on one patient at a time. The CARESCAPE B650 is indicated for monitoring of:

· hemodynamic (including ECG, ST segment, arrhythmia detection, ECG diagnostic and measurement, invasive pressure, non-invasive blood pressure, pulse oximetry, regional oxygen saturation, total hemoglobin concentration, cardiac output (thermodilution and pulse contour), temperature, mixed venous oxygen saturation, and central venous oxygen saturation),

· respiratory (impedance respiration, airway gases (CO2, O2, N2O, and anesthetic agents), spirometry, gas exchange), and

· neurophysiological status (including electroencephalography, Entropy, Bispectral Index (BIS), and neuromuscular transmission).

The CARESCAPE B650 can be a stand-alone monitor or interfaced to other devices. It can also be connected to other monitors for remote viewing and to data management software devices via a network.

The CARESCAPE B650 is able to detect and generate alarms for ECG arrhythmias: atrial fibrillation, accelerated ventricular rhythm, asystole, bigeminy, bradycardia, ventricular couplet, missing beat, multifocal premature ventricular contractions (PVCs), pause, R on T, supra ventricular tachycardia, trigeminy, ventricular bradycardia, ventricular fibrillation/ventricular tachycardia, ventricular tachycardia, and VT>2. The CARESCAPE B650 also shows alarms from other ECG sources.

The CARESCAPE B650 also provides other alarms, trends, snapshots and calculations, and can be connected to displays, printers and recording devices.

The CARESCAPE B650 is intended for use under the direct supervision of a licensed healthcare practitioner, or by personnel trained in proper use of the equipment in a professional healthcare facility.

Contraindications for using CARESCAPE B650:

The CARESCAPE B650 is not intended for use in a controlled MR environment.

CARESCAPE B650 is a new version of a portable multi-parameter patient monitoring system. The CARESCAPE B650 includes the monitor with built-in CPU, power unit, a 15 inch touch display, the CARESCAPE Software and the battery. CARESCAPE B650 is equipped with two module slots where patient data acquisition modules (E-Module type) can be connected to perform patient monitoring. CARESCAPE B650 is equipped with the ePort interface that supports use of PDM or CARESCAPE ONE patient data acquisition devices. In addition to the ePort interface the PDM module can be also connected directly to the CARESCAPE B650 via special slide mount connector which is in the back of the monitor. The CARESCAPE B650 includes features and subsystems that are optional or configurable.

The provided text is a 510(k) Summary for the GE Healthcare CARESCAPE B650 patient monitor. It focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence to a predicate device, rather than presenting a detailed study of acceptance criteria and device performance. Therefore, the information requested in your prompt is largely not available within this document.

Here's a breakdown of what can and cannot be extracted based on the provided text:

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

The document does not provide a specific table of acceptance criteria with corresponding reported device performance values in the format you requested. It states: "Bench testing related to software, hardware and performance including applicable consensus standards was conducted on the CARESCAPE B650, demonstrating the design meets the specifications." This is a general statement about testing without specific criteria or performance metrics.

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

This information is not provided in the document. The document mentions "Bench testing related to software, hardware and performance," but does not detail the nature of the test sets, their size, or their origin.

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 information is not provided. As this is a 510(k) submission for a patient monitor, the primary evidence relies on engineering and performance testing against established standards, not typically on expert consensus for "ground truth" in the way it might be for an AI diagnostic device.

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

This information is not provided. Adjudication methods are typically relevant for studies involving human interpretation or subjective assessments, which are not detailed here.

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

A multi-reader multi-case (MRMC) comparative effectiveness study was not done, and it is not applicable to this submission. The device is a patient monitor, not an AI-assisted diagnostic tool that would involve human readers. The document explicitly states: "The subject of this premarket submission, CARESCAPE B650 did not require clinical studies to support substantial equivalence."

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

The document describes "Bench testing related to software, hardware and performance" and "Software testing included software design, development, verification, validation and traceability." This implies standalone testing of the device's algorithms and functionality. However, specific details about the results of such standalone performance are not provided in a quantifiable manner against acceptance criteria.

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

Given the nature of the device (a multi-parameter patient monitor), "ground truth" would likely be established through:

• Reference measurement devices/standards: For parameters like ECG, blood pressure, oxygen saturation, temperature, etc., the device's measurements would be compared against validated reference devices or established physical standards.
• Simulated physiological signals: For arrhythmia detection, the device would be tested with simulated ECG waveforms containing known arrhythmias.

However, the specific types of "ground truth" used are not explicitly elaborated beyond "bench testing" and "applicable consensus standards."

8. The sample size for the training set

This information is not provided and is generally not applicable in the context of a patient monitor's 510(k) submission unless specific machine learning algorithms requiring training data were a novel aspect of the submission, which is not indicated here. The document describes modifications to software and hardware, implying updates to existing functionalities rather than the introduction of new, data-trained AI models.

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

This information is not provided and is not applicable for the reasons stated in point 8.

Ask a specific question about this device

The CARESCAPE B850 is a multi-parameter patient monitor intended for use in multiple areas within a professional healthcare facility.

The CARESCAPE B850 is intended for use on adult, pediatric, and neonatal patients and on one patient at a time. The CARESCAPE B850 is indicated for monitoring of:

• · hemodynamic (including ECG, ST segment, arthythmia detection, ECG diagnostic analysis and measurement, invasive pressure, non-invasive blood pressure, pulse oximetry, regional oxygen saturation, total hemoglobin concentration, cardiac output (thermodilution and pulse contour), temperature, mixed venous oxygen saturation, and central venous oxygen saturation),
• · respiratory (impedance respiration, airway gases (CO2, O2, N2O, and anesthetic agents), spirometry, gas exchange), and
• · neurophysiological status (including electroencephalography, Entropy, Bispectral Index (BIS), and neuromuscular transmission).

The CARESCAPE B850 can be a stand-alone monitor or interfaced to other devices. It can also be connected to other monitors for remote viewing and to data management software devices via a network.

The CARESCAPE B850 is able to detect and generate alarms for ECG arrhythmias: atrial fibrillation, accelerated ventricular rhythm, asystole, bigeminy, bradycardia, ventricular couplet, missing beat, multifocal premature ventricular contractions (PVCs), pause, R on T, supra ventricular tachycardia, trigeminy, ventricular bradycardia, ventricular fibrillation/ventricular tachycardia, ventricular tachycardia, and VT>2. The CARESCAPE B850 also shows alarms from other ECG sources.

The CARESCAPE B850 also provides other alarms, trends, snapshots and calculations, and can be connected to displays, printers and recording devices.

The CARESCAPE B850 is intended for use under the direct supervision of a licensed healthcare practitioner, or by personnel trained in proper use of the equipment in a professional healthcare facility.

Contraindications for using the monitor

The CARESCAPE B850 is not intended for use in a controlled MR environment.

CARESCAPE B850 is a new version of a modular multi- parameter patient monitoring system. The monitor includes a separate 19-inch touchscreen display, the central processing unit (also called CPU), the CARESCAPE Software, and a module frame F5 or F7. CARESCAPE B850 is equipped with the ePort interface that supports use of PDM or CARESCAPE ONE patient data acquisition modules for patient monitoring. In addition, the F5 module frame has five module slots, and the F7 module frame has seven module slots where patient data acquisition modules (E-Module type), can be connected to perform patient monitoring. The CARESCAPE B850 includes features and subsystems that are optional or configurable.

This looks like a 510(k) summary for the GE Healthcare CARESCAPE B850 patient monitor. I will extract information related to the acceptance criteria and study that proves the device meets them.

Based on the provided text, the CARESCAPE B850 is a multi-parameter patient monitor. The 510(k) submission is for a new version with updated software and minor hardware modifications. The submission refers to a primary predicate device, also named CARESCAPE B850 (K191323), and additional predicate/reference devices for specific parameters (INVOS PM7100 and MASIMO RADICAL Y PULSE CO-OXIMETER).

The key takeaway is that the device did not require clinical studies to support substantial equivalence because it is a modified version of an already cleared device and incorporates previously cleared parameters. Therefore, the "study that proves the device meets the acceptance criteria" primarily refers to non-clinical bench testing.

Here's a breakdown of the requested information based on the provided text:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

The document does not explicitly present a table of acceptance criteria with corresponding performance metrics for the new CARESCAPE B850 compared to a specific threshold. Instead, it relies on the concept of substantial equivalence to a predicate device.

The "acceptance criteria" are implied to be that the performance of the new device is "as safe, as effective, and the performance to be substantially equivalent to the predicate device." The reported "device performance" is primarily that it passed various non-clinical tests.

Implied Acceptance Criteria (based on substantial equivalence concept):

Note: The document states that the fundamental function and operation of the proposed CARESCAPE B850 monitor are unchanged compared to its predicate (K191323), except for the addition of an E-musb Interface module and the capability to display previously cleared hemodynamic parameters from OEM devices (regional oxygen saturation and total hemoglobin concentration).

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

• Sample Size for Test Set: Not explicitly stated. The document refers to "bench testing related to software, hardware and performance." This typically involves testing prototypes or production units, but a "sample size" in the context of patient data is not applicable here as no clinical studies were performed for this submission.
• Data Provenance: Not applicable, as no external data (e.g., patient data from a specific country, retrospective or prospective) was used for this 510(k) submission to demonstrate substantial equivalence. The testing was internal bench testing.

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

• Number of Experts: Not applicable. For bench testing of hardware and software, "ground truth" is typically established by engineering specifications, validated test protocols, and adherence to consensus standards, rather than expert clinical consensus on patient data.
• Qualifications of Experts: Not applicable.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set

• Adjudication Method: Not applicable. This concept applies to clinical studies where discrepancies in observations or diagnoses need to be resolved. For bench testing, test results are typically compared against predefined specifications.

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

• MRMC Study: No. The device is a multi-parameter patient monitor, not an AI-assisted diagnostic tool that would typically involve human readers. The new version mostly focuses on software updates, minor hardware changes, and display of previously cleared parameters from other OEM devices.

6. If a Standalone (i.e., Algorithm Only Without Human-in-the-Loop Performance) Was Done

• Standalone Performance: The core functionality of the device (e.g., ECG, arrhythmia detection, various physiological measurements) operates in a "standalone" fashion in that the algorithms process patient data collected by the sensors. The document doesn't detail specific "algorithm-only" performance metrics as would be seen for a novel AI algorithm. Instead, it relies on the previous clearance of the predicate device and the fact that the algorithms (like EK-Pro arrhythmia detection algorithm V14) are identical. The newly added parameters (regional oxygen saturation and total hemoglobin concentration) are sourced from OEM devices that would have their own standalone performance data from their original clearances.

7. The Type of Ground Truth Used

• Type of Ground Truth: For the non-clinical bench testing, the ground truth would be the engineering specifications of the device and adherence to relevant consensus standards (e.g., for electromagnetic compatibility, electrical safety, environmental performance). For the physiological parameters, the "ground truth" for the algorithms (e.g., arrhythmia detection) was established during the development and clearance of the predicate device (K191323) and the OEM devices for rSO2 and SpHb.

8. The Sample Size for the Training Set

• Sample Size for Training Set: Not applicable. As this is not an AI/ML device that requires a distinct "training set" for model development for this 510(k) submission, this information is not relevant here. The update involves existing algorithms and integration of existing cleared parameters.

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

• How Ground Truth for Training Set Was Established: Not applicable, for the same reason as point 8.

Ask a specific question about this device

The CARESCAPE B450 is a multi-parameter patient monitor intended for use in multiple areas and intrahospital transport within a professional healthcare facility.
The CARESCAPE B450 is intended for use on adult, pediatric, and neonatal patients and on one patient at a time. The CARESCAPE B450 is indicated for monitoring of:
· hemodynamic (including ECG, ST segment, arrhythmia detection, ECG diagnostic and measurement, invasive pressure, non-invasive blood pressure, pulse oximetry, regional oxygen saturation, total hemoglobin concentration, cardiac output (thermodilution and pulse contour), temperature, mixed venous oxygen saturation, and central venous oxygen saturation),
· respiratory (impedance respiration, airway gases (CO2, O2, N2O, and anesthetic agents), spirometry, gas exchange), and
· neurophysiological status (including electroencephalography, Entropy, Bispectral Index (BIS), and neuromuscular transmission).
The CARESCAPE B450 can be a stand-alone monitor or interfaced to other devices. It can also be connected to other monitors for remote viewing and to data management software devices via a network.
The CARESCAPE B450 is able to detect and generate alarms for ECG arrhythmias: atrial fibrillation, accelerated ventricular rhythm, asystole, bigeminy, bradycardia, ventricular couplet, missing beat, multifocal premature ventricular contractions (PVCs), pause, R on T, supra ventricular tachycardia, trigeminy, ventricular bradycardia, ventricular fibrillation/ventricular tachycardia, ventricular tachycardia, and VT>2. The CARESCAPE B450 also shows alarms from other ECG sources.
The CARESCAPE B450 also provides other alarms, trends, snapshots and calculations, and can be connected to displays, printers and recording devices.
The CARESCAPE B450 is intended for use under the direct supervision of a licensed healthcare practitioner, or by personnel trained in proper use of the equipment in a professional healthcare facility

CARESCAPE B450 is a new version of a portable multiparameter patient monitoring system. The CARESCAPE B450 includes the monitor itself with built-in CPU, power unit, a 12 inch touch display, the CARESCAPE Software and one or two batteries. CARESCAPE B450 is equipped with an ePort interface that supports use of PDM or CARESCAPE ONE patient data acquisition modules for patient monitoring. CARESCAPE B450 is also equipped with one module slot where patient data acquisition modules (E-Modules), can be connected to perform patient monitoring. The CARESCAPE B450 includes features and subsystems that are optional or configurable.

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

The document describes the CARESCAPE B450, a multiparameter patient monitor. This submission is for a new version of the device, primarily focusing on updated software and minor hardware modifications.

The document does not contain details about specific acceptance criteria for performance metrics (e.g., sensitivity, specificity, accuracy for arrhythmia detection) or a study proving the device meets those criteria with statistical significance. Instead, it primarily focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence to a predicate device (K191249 CARESCAPE B450) and compliance with general safety and performance standards through non-clinical testing.

Here's a breakdown of the requested information based on the available text:

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

   This information is not explicitly provided in the document. The submission aims to show that the new CARESCAPE B450, with its updated software and minor hardware, is "substantially equivalent" to its predicate device. This implies that its performance is expected to meet the same standards as the predicate, but specific performance metrics and acceptance thresholds for those metrics are not detailed.

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

   This information is not provided. The document states that "Bench testing related to software, hardware and performance including applicable consensus standards was conducted on the CARESCAPE B450, demonstrating the design meets the specifications." It also notes that "The subject of this premarket submission, CARESCAPE B450 did not require clinical studies to support substantial equivalence." This indicates that the primary validation was through non-clinical bench testing, not through studies on patient data.

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 information is not provided. As clinical studies were not required and the validation was primarily non-clinical bench testing, the concept of "ground truth" derived from expert consensus on patient data (as would be typical for AI/ML performance studies) is not applicable or described in this document.

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

   This information is not provided. Since no clinical studies or evaluations of diagnostic performance against a "ground truth" established by experts on a test set are detailed, adjudication methods are not mentioned.

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

   No MRMC comparative effectiveness study was done or reported. The device is a patient monitor with arrhythmia detection, not an AI-assisted diagnostic tool for human readers in the context of an MRMC study.

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

   The document states that "Bench testing related to software, hardware and performance... was conducted," implying that the device's inherent functional performance was tested. The phrase "algorithm only" isn't explicitly used, but the testing would effectively assess the device's standalone operation. However, no specific performance metrics (like those one would expect for an AI algorithm, e.g., sensitivity/specificity for specific arrhythmias) are reported. The device features "EK-Pro arrhythmia detection algorithm EK-Pro V14", and its performance is assumed to be equivalent to the predicate using the same algorithm version.

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

   For the non-clinical bench testing, the "ground truth" would likely be based on established engineering specifications, simulated physiological signals, and validated test protocols inherent to medical device performance testing, rather than expert consensus, pathology, or outcomes data from human subjects. This type of detail is not further elaborated in the document.

8. The sample size for the training set

   This information is not provided. As the submission is for a new version of an existing device primarily involving software updates and minor hardware changes, and the algorithm (EK-Pro V14) itself is listed as "Identical" to the predicate, details about a training set for a new or significantly retrained algorithm are not discussed.

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

   This information is not provided, for the same reasons as point 8.

Ask a specific question about this device