Search Results

Ascent Cardiorespiratory Diagnostic Software is intended to be used for measurements, data collection and analysis of lung function (PFT) parameters, and cardiopulmonary testing (CPET) parameters, aiding in the diagnosis of related conditions.

All the measurements are performed via a mouthpiece or a mask.

The results of the test can be viewed on-line with the help of a computer screen and can be printed after the test. The test results can be saved for further referral or report generation purposes.

For use of the Bronchial Challenge option, the medical director of the laboratory, physician, or person appropriately trained to treat acute bronchoconstriction, including appropriate use of resuscitation equipment, must be close enough to respond quickly to an emergency.

The product can be utilized for patients from 4 years old and older as long as they can cooperate in the performance -- no special limit to patient's sex or height.

Measurements will be performed under the direction of a physician in a hospital environment, physician's office or similar settings.

Ascent™ Cardiorespiratory Diagnostic Software ("Ascent") is a stand-alone software application which can be used with several hardware devices in the Medical Graphics Corporation product line.

The core purpose of the software for measurement, data collection and analysis of testing in patients who may be suffering from pulmonary illnesses like chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), asthma, exercise intolerance, heart failure and/or cardiorespiratory concerns where diagnosis and prognosis needs to be determined.

In conjunction with diagnostic hardware, Ascent is used to collect data pertaining to the patient's degree of obstruction, lung volumes, and diffusing capacity. It is also used to present the collected lung diagnostic information so that it can be checked for quality and interpreted by a qualified physician, often a pulmonologist or cardiologist.

All the measurements are performed via a mouthpiece or a face mask.

The provided text is a 510(k) summary from the FDA, which outlines the substantial equivalence determination for a medical device. This type of document focuses on comparing a new device to existing legally marketed predicate devices rather than providing detailed acceptance criteria and the results of a specific clinical study with granular performance metrics. As such, the document does not contain the specific information needed to fulfill all aspects of your request, particularly regarding detailed performance metrics, sample sizes for test sets (beyond general validation statements), expert qualifications, ground truth establishment methods for test sets, MRMC studies, or training set details.

However, I can extract the information that is present and highlight what is missing based on your request.

Missing Information:

• Detailed Acceptance Criteria Table with Specific Performance Metrics: The document states that the software was "extensively validated per medical device software standards and guidance" and that "Testing results support that Ascent fulfills its intended use/indications for use." It also mentions "Performance tests included FEV1, MVV, FRC, SVC, DLCO, VA, TGV, VO2, VCO2, and VE." However, it does not provide specific quantitative acceptance criteria (e.g., "FEV1 must be within X% of ground truth") or the reported performance for these metrics.
• Sample Size for Test Set and Data Provenance: The document does not specify the sample size for the test data used for performance validation, nor does it detail the provenance (country, retrospective/prospective) of this data.
• Number of Experts and Qualifications for Ground Truth: The document does not describe how ground truth for the test set was established, including the number or specific qualifications of experts involved.
• Adjudication Method for Test Set: No information is provided regarding adjudication methods (e.g., 2+1, 3+1).
• Multi-Reader Multi-Case (MRMC) Comparative Effectiveness Study: The document does not indicate that an MRMC study was performed or provide any effect size for human reader improvement with AI assistance.
• Standalone Performance (Algorithm Only): While the document states "Ascent Cardiorespiratory Diagnostic Software is a stand-alone software application," it describes validation as "Performance validation testing was done with the subject software device and recommended hardware devices working together." It does not provide specific performance metrics for the algorithm only without human interaction in a diagnostic capacity beyond its intended function of measuring, collecting, and analyzing parameters. The software aids diagnosis, implying human interpretation.
• Type of Ground Truth Used (for Test Set): The document implicitly refers to "performance tests" for various physiological parameters (FEV1, DLCO, etc.), suggesting comparison to a reference standard for these measurements. However, it does not explicitly state the nature of this "ground truth" (e.g., expert consensus, pathology, outcome data) beyond reference to ATS/ERS guidelines for standardization.
• Sample Size for Training Set: No information on training data or its size is provided. This is typical for a 510(k) for software that calculates and analyzes data from hardware, rather than an AI/ML model that learns from large datasets.
• How Ground Truth for Training Set was Established: Not applicable as training data details are not provided.

Information that can be extracted from the document:

The provided document is a 510(k) summary for the "Ascent Cardiorespiratory Diagnostic Software" (K242809). It details the device's substantial equivalence to predicate devices, focusing on its intended use, technological characteristics, and conformity to relevant standards and guidelines.

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

As noted above, specific quantitative acceptance criteria and reported performance metrics are NOT provided in this document. The document generally states that "Ascent Cardiorespiratory Diagnostic Software was extensively validated per medical device software standards and guidance. Testing results support that Ascent fulfills its intended use/indications for use..."

It mentions that "Performance tests included FEV1, MVV, FRC, SVC, DLCO, VA, TGV, VO2, VCO2, and VE." However, no numerical results or thresholds are given. The validation was done referencing the following guidelines/standards for "acceptability and repeatability":

• ATS/ ERS Standardisation of Spirometry (2019)
• ERS/ ATS Standardisation of the Measurements of Lung Volumes (2023)
• 2017 ERS/ ATS Standards for Single-Breath Carbon Monoxide Uptake in the Lung
• ERS Technical Standard on Bronchial Challenge Testing (2017)
• 2017 ATS Guidelines for a Standardized PF Report
• ATS/ ACCP Statement on Cardiopulmonary Exercise Testing (2003)

Summary of available information for a table format (conceptual, as specific numerical data is missing):

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

• Sample Size: Not specified. The document only states "Software validation testing involved system level tests, performance tests and safety testing based on hazard analysis. Performance validation testing was done with the subject software device and recommended hardware devices working together."
• 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:

• This information is not provided in the document.

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

• This information is not provided in the document.

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 study is mentioned or implied. The software is described as
  "aiding in the diagnosis of related conditions" and presenting "diagnostic information so that it can be checked for quality and interpreted by a qualified physician." This device is a "Predictive Pulmonary-Function Value Calculator" and performs measurements and analysis, but it is not described as an AI system assisting human readers in image interpretation or diagnosis in a comparative effectiveness study context.

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

• The device is indeed described as a "stand-alone software application." However, the performance validation was done "with the subject software device and recommended hardware devices working together." Its output (measurements and analysis) is intended to be "displayed to the user" and "interpreted by a qualified physician."
• The document does not provide performance metrics for the algorithm only in a way that suggests a diagnostic output without human interpretation or hardware interaction. It's a software that processes data from hardware to provide measurements and analysis, not, for example, a diagnostic image analysis AI.

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

• The document implies that the ground truth for the performance tests (FEV1, DLCO, etc.) would be established by the standardized measurement techniques defined by governing bodies like ATS/ERS/ACCP. These typically involve comparing the device's calculated values against accepted reference methods for deriving those physiological parameters, often involving highly calibrated equipment and expert technicians following strict protocols. However, the exact nature of this "ground truth" (e.g., what gold standard was used for comparison) is not explicitly detailed beyond referencing the standards themselves.

8. The sample size for the training set:

• This information is not provided in the document. This type of device (a calculator/analyzer) is typically engineered based on established physiological formulas and algorithms, rather than being "trained" on large datasets in the way a deep learning AI model would be.

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

• Not applicable, as training set details are not provided and the device functions as a calculator based on established science, not a machine learning model that learns from a labeled training set.

Ask a specific question about this device

The STS device is intended to measure lung function in adult patients while at rest (including spirometry and lung volumes). The STS device is to be used by either a physician, respiratory therapist, or technician. The STS device is intended to be used in a professional healthcare environment.

The STS is a handheld spirometer intended to measure lung function in adult patients while at rest (including spirometry and lung volumes). The STS is to be used by either a physician, respiratory therapist, or technician. The STS device is pulmonary function testing device that measures both flow/volume (spirometry), lung volume and resistance/compliance parameters. It is a multi-use device that should be used with a compatible single-use, disposable mouthpiece which incorporates a viralbacterial filter protecting the patient from the internal components of the device is battery operated allowing for approximately 40 operating hours between charges. The measurement results, which are transmitted via Bluetooth, are displayed on the physician's computer via the STS software/App.

The provided text is a 510(k) summary for the STS device, a pulmonary function data calculator. While it mentions a clinical study, the details provided are limited and do not fully address all requested points regarding acceptance criteria and study specifics for proving the device meets those criteria.

Based on the provided document, here's what can be extracted and what remains unknown:

1. Table of acceptance criteria and reported device performance:

The document primarily focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence to a predicate device rather than explicitly stating acceptance criteria values for performance. However, an implicit acceptance criterion is a "high correlation" and specific statistical thresholds mentioned in the clinical study summary.

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

• Sample Size: 161 subjects (61 females, 100 males, implicitly). This test set was used for the clinical study comparing STS to Body Plethysmography.
• Data Provenance: Not explicitly stated (e.g., country of origin). It is a prospective study as subjects were "enrolled" and "tested by both STS and BP," suggesting data was collected specifically for this study.

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

• The document states that Body Plethysmography (BP) is considered the "gold standard" for measuring lung volumes. Therefore, the BP measurements served as the ground truth.
• It does not specify the number of experts or their qualifications involved in performing or interpreting the Body Plethysmography tests. It's implied that standard clinical practice for BP was followed, which would involve trained medical professionals, but this is not detailed.

4. Adjudication method for the test set:

• No information on adjudication methods is provided. The comparison is directly between the STS device measurements and the "gold standard" Body Plethysmography measurements.

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 Multi-Reader Multi-Case (MRMC) comparative effectiveness study was done or reported. This device is a pulmonary function data calculator and not an AI-assisted diagnostic imaging tool where human reader performance with and without AI assistance would typically be evaluated. The study focuses on the device's accuracy in measuring physiological parameters when compared to a gold standard.

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

• The clinical study described evaluates the "performance of STS technique in calculating resistance and compliance parameters" by comparing it with Body Plethysmography.
• The STS device itself is a "pulmonary function testing device that measures both flow/volume (spirometry), lung volume and resistance/compliance parameters." This implies a standalone performance evaluation of the device's measurements against the gold standard. However, the device "is to be used by either a physician, respiratory therapist, or technician" and its results are "displayed on the physician's computer via the STS software/App," indicating there's a human-in-the-loop for operation and interpretation. The study evaluates the measurement accuracy, which can be seen as a form of standalone performance for the measurement part of the device.

7. The type of ground truth used:

• The ground truth used was "gold standard" Body Plethysmography (BP) measurements of lung volumes. While BP is a clinical measurement, it serves as the established reference standard in this context.

8. The sample size for the training set:

• The document does not provide any information about the sample size used for the training set. This is a 510(k) submission, and often, proprietary training data details are not included in the public summary.

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

• The document does not provide any information on how the ground truth for the training set was established, as details about the training set itself are absent.

Ask a specific question about this device

The Model 9100 PFT/DICO is a pulmonary function testing device which uses Morgan Scientific's ComPAS2 software to measure subject respiratory parameters including FVC, SVC, MVV, CPF, RMS, SNIP, DLCO, MBN2 and SBN2.

The device is PC-based and designed for lung function testing on adults and pediatrics, 6 years and older, in a variety of professional healthcare environments e.g., primary care, hospitals, pharmaceutical research centers and physicians' offices.

The Model 9100 PFT/DICO is intended for the assessment of respiratory function through the measurement of dynamic lung volumes i.e., spirometry and other lung functions i.e., diffusing capacity.

The Model 9100 PFT/DICO is composed of various sensors and valves with associated low level firmware. The firmware interfaces with the Morgan Scientific's ComPAS2 software (K213872) that resides on an on-board computer. The Model 9100 also provides for user input and present resulting data on an integral display.

The ComPAS2 software controls valves and reads unprocessed data from the sensors in the Model 9100then determines respiratory parameters including FVC, SVC, MVV, CPF, RMS (MIP and MEP), SNIP, DLCO, MBN2 and SBN2. The Model 9100 PFT/DICO firmware does not determine any respiratory parameters.

The ComPAS2 software uses flow and volume from the Vitalograph pneumotachograph spirometer to display the flow and volume information measured directly from patient effort. ComPAS2 also utilizes gas analyzer readings from the Model 9100 patient test benchmark to display dilution lung volume data and single / multi breath diffusion data measured directly from patient effort. This information is then provided in a report format.

The provided text describes the regulatory clearance of the Vitalograph Model 9100 PFT/DICO, a pulmonary function testing device, and its substantial equivalence to a predicate device. However, it does not contain information about a study proving the device meets acceptance criteria related to a machine learning or AI model's performance.

The document outlines performance testing conducted for the device's electrical, mechanical, and biocompatibility aspects, as well as software verification and validation. It explicitly states that the device uses "Morgan Scientific's ComPAS2 software to measure subject respiratory parameters," but there's no indication that this software includes an AI or machine learning component that would require a study with human-in-the-loop performance, expert ground truthing, or MRMC studies typically associated with AI/ML medical devices.

Therefore, many of the requested details about acceptance criteria for an AI model's performance and associated study specifics (sample size for test/training, number of experts, adjudication, MRMC, standalone performance, ground truth type) cannot be extracted from this document.

Instead, the document focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence to a predicate device based on similar indications for use, technological characteristics, and principles of operation, supported by standard bench testing and software validation.

Here's an attempt to answer the request based only on the provided text, highlighting the absence of AI/ML-specific details:

Device: Vitalograph Model 9100 PFT/DICO

Study Type: This document describes a 510(k) premarket notification for substantial equivalence, supported by bench testing, software verification/validation, and compliance with various standards. It is not an AI/ML performance study. The "study that proves the device meets the acceptance criteria" refers to the entire body of evidence submitted for 510(k) clearance, rather than a specific AI model's performance study.

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

The document defines performance specifications and states that testing supported the safety and performance, implying these specifications were met. The specific "acceptance criteria" for the overall device's performance are embedded in the compliance with standards and the "similar" comparisons to predicate/reference devices.

Ask a specific question about this device

The monitors are indicated for use by health care professionals whenever there is a need for monitoring the physiological parameters of patients.

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

The monitors are only for use on one patient at a time. They are not intended for use in transport situations. They are not intended for home use. Not therapeutic devices. The monitors are for prescription use only.

The ECG measurement is intended to be used for diagnostic recording of rhythm and detailed morphology of complex cardiac complexes (according to AAMI EC11).

ST segment monitoring is intended for use with adult patients only and is not clinically validated for use with neonatal and pediatric patients.

BIS is intended for use under the direct supervision of a licensed health care practitioner or by personnel trained in its proper use. It is intended for use on adult and pediatric patients within a hospital or medical facility providing patient care to monitor the state of the brain by data acquisition of EEG signals. The BIS may be used as an aid in monitoring the effects of certain anesthetic agents. Use of BIS monitoring to help guide anesthetic administration may be associated with the reduction of the incidence of awareness with recall in adults during general anesthesia and sedation.

The SSC Sepsis Protocol in the ProtocolWatch clinical decision support tool, is intended for use with adult patients only.

The Integrated Pulmonary Index (IPI) is intended for use with adult and pediatric (1 to 12 years) patients only. The IPI is an adjunct to and not intended to replace vital sign monitoring.

The derived measurement Pulse Pressure Variation (PPV) is intended for use with sedated patients receiving controlled mechanical ventilation and mainly free from cardiac arrhythmia. The PPV measurement has been validated only for adult patients.

The IntelliVue NMT Module is intended to be used as an objective neuromuscular transmission monitor, using accelerometry for measuring the muscle contraction following an electrical stimulation of a peripheral nerve. The NMT Module is intended to be used with adult and pediatric patients.

The Masimo rainbow SET measurement is indicated for the noninvasive monitoring of functional oxygen saturation of arterial hemoglobin (SpO2), pulse rate, carboxyhemoglobin saturation (SpCO), methemoglobin saturation (SpMet), total hemoglobin concentration (SpHb), and/or respiratory rate (RRac). The Masimo rainbow SET measurement is indicated for use during both no motion and motion conditions, and for patients who are well or poorly perfused.

The 4-Slot Module rack FMX-4 is intended to connect up to four particular plug-in physiological measurement modules to the dedicated host patient monitors.

The IntelliVue Patient Monitors MX750 and MX850 acquire multiple physiological patient signals, display measurement values, waves and trends, generate physiological and technical alarms, provide data recording and support patient data management. They operate with the external Measurement Modules and the IntelliVue 4-Slot Module Rack FMX-4, which establishes the connection between the individual plug-in measurement modules and the MX750 and MX850 monitors.

The monitors support multiple non-invasive and invasive measurements such as ECG, arrhythmia, ST, QT, SpO2, respiration rate, pulse rate, invasive and non-invasive blood pressure, temperature, CO2, tcpO2/ tcpCO2, C.O., CCO, intravascular SO2, Sv02, ScvO2, EEG, BIS, NMT, and gas analysis.

The monitors offer a monitoring solution optimized for the surgical, cardiac, medical and neonatal care environments. They are located in the patient vicinity at the bedside. These devices have a color display with a touch-screen as a primary input device. They also support keyboard and pointing devices such as a mouse.

The monitor models MX750 and MX850 differ mainly in size. Whilst MX750 has a 19" flat panel display, MX850 has a 22" display.

The hardware of the new 4-Slot Module Rack FMX-4 is very similar to that of its 8 years old predicate 4-Slot Module Rack FMS-4. The new FMX-4 has the same housing, which is made of the same material as FMS-4 but has a slightly different shade of color (same shade of color as the new MX750 and MX850 monitors). The FMX-4 has a new Printed Circuit Assembly with standard hardware components like CPU and memory being replaced by state of the art electronic components.

The software modifications comprise the following changes:

• Support of the new state-of-the-art electronic components.
• Modified elements of the Graphical User Interface.
• Implementation of a feature called Electronic Strip Recording. This feature allows electronic strips that can be reviewed on the monitor and printed out as a report on the printer.
• Modification of the existing feature Remote Applications to support HTML5 and PDF format.

This document is a 510(k) summary for the Philips IntelliVue Patient Monitors MX750 and MX850 and the IntelliVue 4-Slot Module Rack FMX-4. It states that these devices are substantially equivalent to previously cleared predicate devices (Philips IntelliVue Patient Monitor MX800 and Philips IntelliVue 4-Slot Module Rack FMS-4). The submission primarily focuses on hardware and software modifications to existing devices.

The information provided does not detail specific acceptance criteria and device performance in the format of a table with numerical values for metrics like sensitivity, specificity, or accuracy, as would be common for an AI/ML device study. Instead, it describes compliance with recognized consensus standards and general V&V activities. This is likely because the device is a patient monitor, and the modifications are primarily hardware updates and minor software changes to support the new hardware and improve existing functionalities, not a new AI/ML algorithm requiring extensive clinical performance validation against a pre-defined ground truth for diagnostic accuracy.

Therefore, many of the requested items (e.g., sample size for test set, number of experts for ground truth, adjudication method, MRMC comparative effectiveness study, standalone performance) are not explicitly addressed in the provided text as they pertain more to novel diagnostic or AI algorithms rather than general patient monitoring device updates.

I can, however, extract information about the types of tests conducted and general statements about meeting requirements.

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

The document does not provide a table with specific numerical acceptance criteria and corresponding device performance metrics (e.g., sensitivity, specificity, AUC) for the various physiological parameters monitored by the device. Instead, it states that "Test methods and acceptance criteria were the same as those for the predicate devices and test results showed substantial equivalence with respect to safety and effectiveness."

The V&V activities focused on compliance with various international standards:

2. Sample size used for the test set and the data provenance

The document does not specify a "test set" in terms of subject count or data record count for performance evaluation in the context of, for example, diagnostic algorithm accuracy. The studies described are primarily engineering validation and verification tests against established standards. Therefore, information regarding data provenance (e.g., country of origin, retrospective/prospective) is not provided.

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

As there is no "test set" described for a diagnostic algorithm, this information is not applicable and not provided in the document. The human factors engineering testing involved "focus groups" and "expert reviews," but the number and qualifications of these experts are not specified, nor were they establishing ground truth for a diagnostic outcome.

4. Adjudication method for the test set

Not applicable, as no dedicated "test set" requiring adjudication for ground truth of a diagnostic outcome is described.

5. If a multi reader multi case (MRMC) comparative effectiveness study was done

No MRMC comparative effectiveness study is mentioned. The device is a patient monitor, and the submission concerns updates to an existing monitoring platform, not a new AI diagnostic aid that would typically warrant such a study.

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

This concept is less applicable to a patient monitoring device update. The performance evaluation focuses on the device's ability to accurately measure and display physiological parameters and generate alarms in compliance with safety and performance standards, rather than an autonomous diagnostic algorithm. The document states the monitors are "for use by trained healthcare professionals."

7. The type of ground truth used

For the various measurement parameters (ECG, SpO2, etc.), the "ground truth" implicitly aligns with the accuracy and performance specifications outlined in the referenced standards (e.g., AAMI EC11 for ECG, ISO 80601-2-61 for pulse oximetry). These standards define acceptable deviations from known physical or simulated physiological signals. The document does not describe the establishment of ground truth in the context of expert consensus, pathology, or outcomes data, as would be relevant for a diagnostic AI algorithm.

8. The sample size for the training set

This information is not provided. The document primarily describes hardware and software updates to an existing system, rather than the development and training of a new AI/ML algorithm.

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

Not applicable, as the document does not describe the development or training of a new AI/ML algorithm.

Ask a specific question about this device

The monitors are indicated for use by health care professionals whenever there is a need for monitoring the physiological parameters of patients.

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

The monitors are additionally intended for use in transport situations within hospital environments.

The monitors are only for use on one patient at a time. They are not intended for home use. Not therapeutic devices. The monitors are for prescription use only.

The ECG measurement is intended to be used for diagnostic recording of rhythm and detailed morphology of complex cardiac complexes (according to AAMI EC 11).

ST segment monitoring is intended for use with adult patients only and is not clinically validated for use with neonatal and pediatric patients.

The transcutaneous gas measurement (tcGas) with the M1018A plug-in module is restricted to neonatal patients only.

BIS is intended for use under the direct supervision of a licensed health care practitioner or by personnel trained in its proper use. It is intended for use on adult and pediatric patients within a hospital or medical facility providing patient care to monitor the state of the brain by data acquisition of EEG signals. The BIS may be used as an aid in monitoring the effects of certain anesthetic agents. Use of BIS monitoring to help guide anesthetic administration may be associated with the reduction of the incidence of awareness with recall in adults during general anesthesia and sedation.

The SSC Sepsis Protocol, in the ProtocolWatch clinical decision support tool, is intended for use with adult patients only.

The Integrated Pulmonary Index (IPI) is intended for use with adult and pediatric (1 to 12 years) patients only. The IPI is an adjunct to and not intended to replace vital sign monitoring.

The derived measurement Pulse Pressure Variation (PPV) is intended for use with sedated patients receiving controlled mechanical ventilation and mainly free from cardiac arrhythmia. The PPV measurement has been validated only for adult patients.

The IntelliVue NMT Module is intended to be used as an objective neuromuscular transmission monitor, using accelerometry for measuring the muscle contraction following an electrical stimulation of a peripheral nerve. The NMT Module is intended to be used with adult and pediatric patients.

The Masimo rainbow SET measurement is indicated for the noninvasive monitoring of functional oxygen saturation of arterial hemoglobin (SpO2), pulse rate, carboxyhemoglobin saturation (SpCO), methemoglobin saturation (SpMet), total hemoglobin concentration (SpHb), and/or respiratory rate (RRac). The Masimo rainbow SET measurement is indicated for use during both no motion and motion conditions, and for patients who are well or poorly perfused.

The noninvasive Masimo O3 Regional Oximeter System and accessories are intended for use as an adjunct monitor of absolute and trended regional hemoglobin oxygen saturation of blood (rSO2) in the cerebral region under the sensors. The Masimo O3 Regional Oximeter System and accessories are indicated for use on adults ≥40 kg and on pediatrics ≥5 kg and

The IntelliVue Patient Monitors MX500 and MX550 acquire multiple physiological patient signals, display measurement values, waves and trends, generate physiological and technical alarms, provide data recording and support patient data management. The monitors support multiple non-invasive and invasive measurements such as ECG, arrhythmia, ST, QT, SpO2, respiration rate, pulse rate, invasive and noninvasive blood pressure, temperature, CO2, tcpO2/ tcpCO2, C.O., CCO, intravascular SO2, SvO2, ScvO2, spirometry, EEG, BIS, NMT, and gas analysis.

The monitors offer a monitoring solution optimized for the surgical, cardiac, medical and neonatal care environments. They are located at the patient bedside vicinity and can also be used during patient transport inside hospitals.

The monitors have a color display with touchscreen as a primary input device. They also support a specialized remote control, keyboard and pointing devices such as a mouse. External displays can be connected to a built-in video port to provide an adaptive duplicate image of the primary display.

The monitors can interact with several compatible external measuring and auxiliary devices locally at the bedside or in transport situations and with the Central Station via LAN or wireless link.

Here's a breakdown of the acceptance criteria and the study information for the Philips IntelliVue Patient Monitors MX500 and MX550 based on the provided FDA 510(k) summary:

This submission is a 510(k) for modifications to an existing device, the IntelliVue Patient Monitors MX500 and MX550. The acceptance criteria and supporting studies primarily focus on demonstrating that the modifications do not introduce new questions of safety or effectiveness and that the modified device remains substantially equivalent to the predicate device.

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

Since this is an update to an existing device focusing on integrating new measurement modules (Masimo O3, IRMA CO2, ISA CO2) and updating EMC standards, the "acceptance criteria" are primarily related to meeting established performance standards for patient monitors and demonstrating that the new modules function as intended without compromising the overall device safety or efficacy. The document doesn't present specific numerical acceptance criteria for all physiological parameters of the overall monitor, but rather confirms compliance with recognized standards.

Ask a specific question about this device

The monitors are indicated for use by health care professionals whenever there is a need for monitoring the physiological parameters of patients.

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

The MP5 and MP5SC monitors are also intended for use during patient transport inside the hospital environment; only the MP5 monitor is for use during patient transport outside of the hospital environment. The MP5 and MP5SC when used with the TRx4841A/TRx4851A IntelliVue Telemetry System Transceiver or with the IntelliVue Cableless Measurement Devices, are intended for use in a hospital environment and during patient transport inside the hospital environment.

The monitors are only for use on one patient at a time. They are not intended for home use. Not therapeutic devices. The monitors are for prescription use only.

The ECG measurement is intended to be used for diagnostic recording of rhythm and detailed morphology of complex cardiac complexes (according to AAMI EC 11).

ST segment monitoring is intended for use with adult patients only and is not clinically validated for use with neonatal and pediatric patients.

The Predictive Temperature unit is intended for use with adult and pediatric patients in a hospital environment.

The SSC Sepsis Protocol, in the Protocol Watch clinical decision support tool, is intended for use with adult patients only.

The Integrated Pulmonary Index (IPI) is intended for use with adult and pediatric (1 to 12 years) patients only. The IPI is an adjunct to and not intended to replace vital sign monitoring.

The derived measurement Pulse Pressure Variation (PPV) is intended for use with sedated patients receiving controlled mechanical ventilation and mainly free from cardiac arrhythmia. The PPV measurement has been validated only for adult patients.

The Masimo rainbow SET measurement is indicated for the noninvasive monitoring of functional oxygen saturation of arterial hemoglobin (SpO2), pulse rate, carboxyhemoglobin saturation (SpCO), methemoglobin saturation (SpMet), total hemoglobin concentration (SpHb), and/or respiratory rate (RRac). The Masimo rainbow SET measurement is indicated for use during both no motion and motion conditions, and for patients who are well or poorly perfused.

The transcutaneous gas measurement (tcGas) with the M1018A plug-in module is restricted to neonatal patients only.

BIS is intended for use under the direct supervision of a licensed health care practitioner or by personnel trained in its proper use. It is intended for use on adult and pediatric patients within a hospital or medical facility providing patient care to monitor the state of the brain by data acquisition of EEG signals. The BIS may be used as an aid in monitoring the effects of certain anesthetic agents. Use of BIS monitoring to help guide anesthetic administration may be associated with the reduction of the incidence of awareness with recall in adults during general anesthesia and sedation.

The IntelliVue NMT Module is intended to be used as an objective neuromuscular transmission monitor, using accelerometry for measuring the muscle contraction following an electrical stimulation of a peripheral nerve. The NMT Module is intended to be used with adult and pediatric patients.

The IntelliVue Patient Monitors MP5, MP5SC, MX100, MX400, MX430, MX450, MX500, MX550, MX700, MX800 and IntelliVue Multi-Measurement Module X3 acquire multiple physiological patient signals, display measurement values, waves and trends, generate physiological and technical alarms, provide data recording and support patient data management.

The monitors support multiple non-invasive and invasive measurements such as ECG, arrhythmia, ST, QT, SpO2, respiration rate, pulse rate, heart rate, invasive and noninvasive blood pressure, temperature, CO2, tcpO2/ tcpCO2, C.O., CCO, intravascular SO2, Sv02, ScvO2, spirometry, EEG, BIS, NMT, and gas analysis.

The monitors offer a monitoring solution optimized for the surgical, cardiac, medical and neonatal care environments. They are located in the patient vicinity at the bedside. Several monitor models can also be used mobile, during patient transport inside or outside of hospitals.

The monitors have a color display with touch-screen and/or keys and a navigation point as a primary input device. They also support further local input devices such as specialized remote control, keyboard, and mouse. External displays can be connected to a built-in video port to provide an adaptive duplicate image of the primary display.

The monitors can interact with several compatible external measuring and auxiliary devices locally at the bedside or in transport situations and with the Central Station via LAN or wireless link.

With the current software Rev. N.0 the following modifications have been introduced:

• Implementation of the existing feature Alarm Advisor into the IntelliVue Patient Monitor MX100 and Multi-Measurement Module X3. Alarm Advisor provides feedback on recurring and continuous alarm limit violations based on configured criteria. The information provided by the Alarm Advisor supports device operator in adapting alarm limits more specifically. This is the same functionality as that in other IntelliVue Patient Monitors: MP5, MP5SC, MX400, MX430, MX450, MX500, MX550, MX700, and MX800 (cleared with K161531).
• Modification of a few specific elements of the Graphical User Interface (GUI) of the IntelliVue Patient Monitors MP5, MP5SC, MX100, MX400, MX430, MX450, MX500, MX550, MX700, MX800, and the Intelli Vue Multi-Measurement Module X3:
  • The key 'Silence' has been renamed to 'Acknowledge',
  • A new default configuration for the Pause/Switch off of alarms via 'Acknowledge' key combined with a specific pop-up window has been added to all monitor models,
  • New default configurations of visual alarm indicators with other colors and flashing behavior of the alarm numerics and limits have been added.

The provided document is a 510(k) premarket notification from Philips Medizin Systeme Boeblingen GmbH to the FDA for their IntelliVue Patient Monitors. This document primarily focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence to previously cleared predicate devices and addressing minor software modifications, specifically the implementation of an "Alarm Advisor" feature and GUI changes related to alarm management.

The document does not contain the specific details required to answer all parts of your request, particularly regarding clinical performance studies with specific acceptance criteria, sample sizes for test and training sets, expert consensus, or MRMC studies for an AI device. This is because the submission is for a patient monitor and its software updates, not an AI-powered diagnostic device in the sense that would require such extensive clinical validation to demonstrate improved human reader performance or standalone algorithm performance.

However, I can extract information related to the acceptance criteria and study proving the device meets its acceptance criteria, based on the scope of this type of submission.

Here's an analysis based on the provided text, while acknowledging the limitations for a full AI device performance study:

Acceptance Criteria and Device Performance (as evident from this 510(k) submission):

For this type of device (patient monitors with software updates), the "acceptance criteria" and "device performance" are primarily demonstrated through compliance with recognized standards, hazard analysis, and functional/regression testing rather than a clinical trial with a defined performance metric like sensitivity/specificity for a diagnostic AI.

Study Details (based on the provided document):

Given that this is a 510(k) for patient monitors with minor software updates, the "study" is primarily a series of verification and validation (V&V) activities focused on engineering and software aspects, rather than a clinical trial for an AI diagnostic.

1. Sample Size Used for the Test Set and Data Provenance:

   • The document does not specify a "test set" in the context of a dataset for an AI model. Instead, it refers to V&V activities that include:
     • Hazard Analysis Testing: "All specified pass/fail criteria have been met." (No specific sample size of incidents/scenarios mentioned, typically an engineering analysis).
     • Functional System Level Tests: Performed on a variety of monitor models (MP5, MP5SC, MX100, MX400, MX430, MX450, MX500, MX550, MX700, MX800, Multi-Measurement Module X3) for the new features (Alarm Advisor, blinking numerics, Alarm Acknowledge, Pause/Switch off Alarms). No specific number of test cases or "patients" is provided.
     • Regression Tests: Performed on the same range of monitor models to ensure unchanged functions still work.
   • Data Provenance: Not applicable in the context of clinical data for AI model evaluation. The tests are performed on the device itself and its software.

2. Number of Experts Used to Establish the Ground Truth for the Test Set and Qualifications:

   • Not described as "ground truth" establishment in this context. For usability testing, it mentions "expert reviews" as part of formative evaluations, but the specific number and qualifications of these experts are not detailed. These would typically be human factors engineers, clinical specialists, or design experts.

3. Adjudication Method for the Test Set:

   • Not applicable as there is no "test set" of clinical cases requiring adjudication. The V&V activities are based on engineering specifications and standard compliance.

4. If a Multi-Reader Multi-Case (MRMC) Comparative Effectiveness Study was Done:

   • No. An MRMC study is relevant for diagnostic imaging AI systems where human readers interpret medical images with and without AI assistance. This submission is for patient monitors and their alarm management and GUI features, which do not involve diagnostic interpretation in that manner. The "Alarm Advisor" provides feedback on alarm limit violations, which is a clinical decision support tool related to device settings, not an image interpretation aid.

5. If a Standalone (i.e., algorithm only without human-in-the-loop performance) Study was Done:

   • Yes, to an extent, in the sense that the new software features were functionally tested independently of human interaction (e.g., "Functional tests... All tests have been passed"). The "Alarm Advisor" functionality and GUI changes needed to perform as specified by the algorithm/software design. However, this is not a "standalone performance study" in the context of an AI diagnostic that might output a diagnosis or risk score. It's more about verifying software logic and output.

6. The Type of Ground Truth Used:

   • Engineering Specifications and Standards Compliance. For the new features and existing functionalities, the "ground truth" is whether the software performs according to its design specifications, established industry standards (e.g., IEC 60601-1-8 for alarms), and internal quality requirements. For usability, "user feedback" (from focus groups, usability tests) serves as the basis for improvement.

7. The Sample Size for the Training Set:

   • Not applicable. This device is not an AI model that undergoes a "training phase" from a clinical dataset in the traditional machine learning sense. The software development process involves design, coding, and V&V activities.

8. How the Ground Truth for the Training Set Was Established:

   • Not applicable for the same reason as above.

Ask a specific question about this device

The Vyntus/SentrySuite Product Line is intended to be used for measurements, data collection and analysis of lung function (PFT) and cardio-pulmonary (CPET) parameters, aiding in the diagnosis of related conditions. The results of the test can be viewed online with the help of a computer screen and can be printed after the test results can be saved for future reference or report generation purposes.

The products can be utilized with patients age 4 years and older as long as they can cooperate in the performance - no special limit to patient's sex or height exists. Measurements will be performed under the direction of a physician in a hospital environment, physician's office or similar setting (professional healthcare facilities).

A qualified physician has to reassess all Vyntus/SentrySuite measurements. An interpretation by Vyntus/SentrySuite is only significant if it is considered in connection with other clinical findings.

Additional for Vyntus ECG:

The Vyntus ECG is intended for measuring the surface electrocardiogram (ECG) of a patient. The acquired ECG can be recorded and displayed on the screen or printed on paper. 12-lead ECGs are analyzed automatically and suggestions for the interpretation of the resting ECG can be made by the software. ECG interpretation statements made by the Vyntus/ SentrySuite represent partial qualitative information on the patient's cardiovascular condition and no therapy or drugs can be administered based solely on the interpretation statements.

The Vyntus ECG can be used for non-interpretive applications in patients age 4 years and older and a weight of 20 kg or higher. The Vyntus ECG is intended to be used for routine ECG collection, recording both under resting and stress conditions. The measurement is performed by trained healthcare professionals under the direction of a physician in healthcare facilities (e.g. the doctor's office or hospital). The Vyntus ECG is not intended for intracranial use. The Vyntus ECG is not intended for use in an EMS environment (Emergency Medical Services Environment). The Vyntus ECC is not intended for use in home healthcare environments. Automatic interpretation of the ECG is not possible for pediatric and adolescent patients below 16 years of age and for patients with pacemakers.

Option Hi/Lo FiO2: The High/low FiO2 option of the Vyntus CPX is designed to measure the ventilation and the gas exchange (02 uptake, CO2 production) of a subject with varying inspiratory concentrations of O2.

This document primarily details a 510(k) premarket notification for the Vyntus/SentrySuite Product Line, specifically focusing on the addition of an option for High/Low FiO2. The submission aims to demonstrate substantial equivalence to previously cleared devices.

Here's an analysis of the provided text with respect to your requested information:

1. Table of acceptance criteria and the reported device performance

The document does not explicitly state "acceptance criteria" in a numerical or target performance metric for each characteristic. Instead, it refers to passing "applicable tests and standards" and meeting "user needs and design inputs." The performance data section focuses on demonstrating the device meets the technical specifications and accuracy of its predecessors.

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

The document primarily describes bench performance data and compliance with standards. It does not mention a specific "test set" in terms of patient data or a clinical study for the new High/Low FiO2 option. The testing appears to be centered on engineering and regulatory compliance rather than clinical performance data from a patient sample. Therefore, there is no information provided regarding sample size, country of origin, or retrospective/prospective nature of data for a clinical test set.

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)

Given that clinical testing was not performed (stated explicitly), there is no information about experts used to establish ground truth for a clinical test set. The performance data is based on engineering tests against established technical specifications for pulmonary function devices.

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

As no clinical test set is described, there is no information on an adjudication method for a test set.

5. If a multi reader multi case (MRMC) comparative effectiveness study was done, If so, what was the effect size of how much human readers improve with AI vs without AI assistance

This submission is for a pulmonary function and cardio-pulmonary exercise testing device, not an AI-assisted diagnostic or interpretive system in the context of "human readers." While the Vyntus ECG component does offer automatic analysis and "suggestions for the interpretation," the document states these are "partial qualitative information" and "no therapy or drugs can be administered based solely on the interpretation statements." Furthermore, for the new option, no MRMC comparative effectiveness study is mentioned, nor is any AI assistance or effect size on human readers discussed.

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

While the device includes software with automated analysis for ECG, the focus of this submission is on the added High/Low FiO2 option for the CPX system and the overall compliance of the product line. No specific standalone performance study of an algorithm independent of the device's measurement capabilities is detailed. The performance testing section refers to "Accuracy Testing" as a general item but does not specify a standalone algorithm performance study.

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

For the technical performance tests discussed (flow, volume, ventilation accuracy), the ground truth would typically be established by reference standards or highly accurate calibration devices that measure these physical parameters precisely. The document refers to "applicable tests and standards" for accuracy testing. For the non-clinical tests (safety, EMC, risk management, usability, software life cycle, biocompatibility), the ground truth is simply compliance with the respective international standards (e.g., IEC 60601-1, ISO 14971). There is no mention of ground truth based on expert consensus, pathology, or outcomes data, as clinical testing was not performed for this submission.

8. The sample size for the training set

The document states, "Clinical testing was not performed with this device." Therefore, there is no information on a training set or its sample size as no clinical data appears to have been used for an algorithm development for this specific submission's context.

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

As no clinical training set is mentioned, there is no information provided on how ground truth for a training set was established.

Ask a specific question about this device

The Vyntus BODY is intended to be used for measurements, data collection and analysis of lung function (PFT) parameters, aiding in the diagnosis of related conditions. All the measurements are performed via a mouthpiece, a mask or nasal adapters. The results of the test can be viewed online with the help of a computer screen and can be printed after the test. The test results can be saved for future reference or report generation purposes.

The products can be utilized with patients aged 4 years and older as long as they can cooperate in the performance - no special limit to patient's sex or height exists.

Measurements will be performed under the direction of a physician in a hospital environment, physician's office or similar setting (professional healthcare facilities).

A qualified physician has to reassess all Vyntus BODY measurements. An interpretation by SentrySuite is only significant if it is considered in connection with other clinical findings.

The Vyntus BODY is a whole-bodyplethysmograph and consists of the Vyntus BODY cabin, an ultrasonic flow sensor (USS), and a shutter. The Vyntus BODY system allows the determination of a subjects' pulmonary function status. It includes the determination of the subjects' ventilatory flows and volume by means of the USS. The measurement of the lung diffusion by the DLCO technique is accomplished with the supply of test gas and the gas analyzers for methane (CH4) and carbone monoxide (CO).

All variants are stationary and not battery operated. The sensor data is sent to a host computer system via cable connection for processing, storage, and reporting. The host computer can be networked via LAN, WLAN, or Internet.

All measurements are performed with the use of the Windows based operating software SentrySuite (SeS). The SeS software also stores the measurement results and provides output capabilities.

The host computer, monitor, and printer are mounted on the Vyntus Cart. Use of the cart is optional; computing equipment may be placed on other furniture.

The provided text is a 510(k) summary for the Vyntus BODY, a pulmonary-function data calculator. It outlines the device's characteristics, its comparison to predicate devices, and the performance data submitted to support its substantial equivalence. However, it does not contain a detailed study report that proves the device meets specific acceptance criteria with reported device performance metrics and specific sample sizes for test sets.

The document focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence to predicate devices, rather than an independent performance study against predefined criteria.

Therefore, many of the requested details about acceptance criteria, reported performance, sample sizes, ground truth establishment, expert involvement, and MRMC studies are not explicitly provided in this document.

Here's what can be extracted and what is missing:

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

The document mentions "Accuracy testing" as one of the performance data provided. In the "Patient User Interface Specifications" table (Page 7-8), it lists performance specifications for flow and volume accuracy which can be considered acceptance criteria. However, it does not explicitly provide the reported device performance against these criteria in a clear table format. The table below presents the acceptance criteria as listed:

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

• Sample size for the test set: Not mentioned.
• Data provenance: Not mentioned. The document primarily refers to "Accuracy testing" as a type of performance data provided, but without details on the studies or datasets used for this testing.

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. The device is a "Pulmonary-function data calculator," suggesting that its accuracy would likely be evaluated against established physiological measurement standards, not necessarily against expert human interpretation in the same way an AI diagnostic imaging tool would be.

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

Not applicable or not mentioned. The device's primary function is to measure and calculate lung function parameters; its performance would likely be validated against metrological standards or established calibration methods, rather than through an adjudication process of expert interpretations.

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. The Vyntus BODY is a pulmonary function data calculator, not an AI-assisted diagnostic tool that aids human readers in interpreting complex medical images or data. Therefore, an MRMC study comparing human readers with and without AI assistance is not relevant to this device's function or validation.

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

The device itself is a standalone system for measurements, data collection, and analysis. It is designed to perform these functions "without human-in-the-loop performance" in terms of its direct measurement and calculation capabilities. The document states, "A qualified physician has to reassess all Vyntus BODY measurements. An interpretation by SentrySuite is only significant if it is considered in connection with other clinical findings." This indicates that while the device performs its analytical function standalone, ultimate clinical interpretation requires a physician.

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

The "Accuracy testing" mentioned would typically use calibrated instruments or known physical standards as ground truth for flow and volume measurements. The document references "ATS/ERS Task Force: Standardization of Lung Function Testing," implying that the device's performance is likely measured against these established international standards for pulmonary function testing.

8. The sample size for the training set:

Not applicable or not mentioned. The device appears to be a measurement and calculation system, not a machine learning or AI algorithm that requires a "training set" in the conventional sense. Its functionality is based on known physiological principles and instrumentation, likely calibrated against standard references.

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

Not applicable, as there's no indication of a "training set" for an AI/ML algorithm.

Ask a specific question about this device

Ascent Cardiorespiratory Diagnostic Software is intended to be used for measurements, data collection and analysis of lung function (PFT) parameters, aiding in the diagnosis of related conditions. All the measurements are performed via a mouthpiece or a mask. The test can be viewed on-line with the help of a computer screen and can be printed after the test results can be saved for further referral or report generation purposes.

For use of the Bronchial Challenge option, the medical director of the laboratory, physician, or person appropriately trained to treat acute bronchoconstriction, including appropriate use of resuscitation equipment, must be close enough to respond quickly to an emergency.

The product can be utilized for patients from 4 years old and older as long as they can cooperate in the performance -- no special limit to patient's sex or height.

Measurements will be performed under the direction of a physician in a hospital environment, physician's office or similar settings.

In conjunction with pulmonary diagnostic hardware, Ascent software, a Windows desktop application developed using Microsoft's NET Framework, is used to collect data pertaining to the patient's degree of obstruction, lung volumes, and diffusing capacity. It is also used to present the collected lung diagnostic information so that it can be checked for quality and interpreted by a qualified physician, usually a pulmonologist.

The core purpose of the software is to facilitate pulmonary function testing in patients who may be suffering from pulmonary illnesses like Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease and asthma. The software will interact with connected Medical Graphics Corporation diagnostic devices to perform the desired pulmonary function tests on the patient by a professional pulmonary function technologist. The application will display both actual and derived test variables to the user after a test is performed for purposes of data review.

Here's a breakdown of the acceptance criteria and study information for the Ascent Cardiorespiratory Diagnostic Software, based on the provided document:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance:

The document doesn't explicitly list "acceptance criteria" in a typical quantitative pass/fail format within a table. Instead, it describes general validation and performance testing. However, we can infer the performance objectives and how they were met.

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

• Sample Size for Test Set: 38 test sessions.
• Data Provenance: The subjects for these test sessions were "from seven to sixty-three years old." The document does not specify the country of origin of the data or whether it was retrospective or prospective.

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

The document does not specify the number of experts or their qualifications used to establish ground truth for the test set. It mentions that the software presents data to a "qualified physician, usually a pulmonologist, for diagnostic interpretation," but this refers to the intended use, not the ground truth establishment for the validation study itself.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set:

The document does not describe any specific adjudication method (e.g., 2+1, 3+1). The "physiologic performance validation testing" implies direct measurement comparison rather than expert consensus on interpretive tasks.

5. If a Multi-Reader Multi-Case (MRMC) Comparative Effectiveness Study Was Done:

No, an MRMC comparative effectiveness study was not explicitly mentioned or described as being performed. The study focused on the performance of the software and integrated hardware, not on the impact of the software on human reader performance.

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

Yes, the "physiologic performance validation testing" and "software validation testing" described seem to represent a standalone assessment of the device's ability to measure and process pulmonary function parameters. The device's core function is data collection and analysis, which occurs without direct human interpretation assistance during the measurement phase. The overall intention is for a "qualified physician" to interpret the results generated by the algorithm.

7. The Type of Ground Truth Used:

The document doesn't explicitly state "ground truth" in the context of reference standards. However, the nature of the device (pulmonary function software) implies that the ground truth for "physiologic performance validation testing" would be the physical measurements obtained from the connected hardware devices for various pulmonary function parameters (e.g., airflow, volume, gas concentrations). The accuracy of these measurements would be compared against expected values or highly accurate reference standards, though these specific reference standards are not detailed in the provided text.

8. The Sample Size for the Training Set:

The document does not mention any training set sample size or details about a training set. This is likely because the device, as described, is not an AI/machine learning model that typically requires a discrete training phase with labeled data. It appears to be a software system for data acquisition, processing, and display based on established physiological algorithms and hardware interaction.

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

As no training set is discussed, there is no information on how its ground truth might have been established.

Ask a specific question about this device

The COR12 ECG is intended for measuring the surface electrocardiogram (ECG) of a patient. The acquired ECG can be recorded and displayed on a screen or printed on paper. The COR12 ECG can be used for applications in patients age 4 years and older and a weight of 20 kg or higher. The COR12 ECG is intended to be used for routine ECG collection, recording both under resting and stress conditions. The measurement is performed by trained healthcare professionals under the direction of a physician in healthcare facilities (e.g. the doctor's office or hospital).

The COR12 ECG is intended for the recording of 12-lead ECG data of a patient by trained staff, e.g., nurse, doctor's assistant or the doctor. This can be performed as a resting or a stress ECG. It transmits the ECG data in a specified format by Bluetooth transmission to a customer-defined host software running with its own display, which is not part of the COR12. There is no display of ECG waveforms on the COR12.

Here's a breakdown of the acceptance criteria and study information for the COR12 ECG device, based on the provided FDA 510(k) summary:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

The device is claiming substantial equivalence to its predicate (Vyntus ECG – K150810) by stating that they are identical in all aspects. Therefore, the "acceptance criteria" and "reported device performance" are assumed to be the same as the predicate device, as per the submission's claim of identicality.

Ask a specific question about this device