Search Results

The Blood Pressure Monitor is intended to measure the systolic and diastolic blood pressure as well as the pulse rate by using the arm cuff. The device can be used in medical facilities or at home, and only for indoor use. It is supplied for OTC use.

The blood pressure monitor is a fully automatic, non-invasive upper arm measurement device using oscillometric methodology to measure systolic pressure, diastolic pressure and pulse rate. The device features an inflatable cuff that wraps around the arm, with a built-in pressure sensor and transducer that analyze arterial pulsations to determine blood pressure values. Measurement results are clearly displayed on the LCD screen.

N/A

Ask a specific question about this device

The HemoSphere Stream™ Module when used with a Smart Pressure Controller (PC1Q) and VitaWave™ Plus Finger Cuff is indicated for use in adult patients to provide continuous, non-invasive arterial pressure waveform output to a compatible multi-parameter patient monitor. The device is designed for use in clinical environments requiring continuous assessment of blood pressure waveform morphology, without the need for an invasive catheter.

The HemoSphere Stream™ Module when used with the Smart Pressure Controller (PC1Q) and VitaWave™ Plus Finger Cuff is indicated for use in adult patients to provide continuous, non-invasive arterial pressure waveform output to a compatible multi-parameter patient monitor.

N/A

Ask a specific question about this device

The wrist automatic blood pressure monitor LD-735,LD-752,LD-753 is intended for the non-invasive measurement of systolic and diastolic arterial blood pressure and pulse rate in adults (aged 15 and above).

The Wrist Automatic Blood Pressure Monitor is an automatic, non-invasive, blood pressure measurement device that is intended to measure the systolic and diastolic arterial blood pressure and pulse rate. The systolic and diastolic pressure are determined using the oscillometric method, where the cuff is inflated with a pump and deflates via an automatic electronic valve. During the inflation measurements, an electric pump within the main unit slowly inflates the wrist cuff, generating cuff pressure which is monitored and from which pulse waveform data is extracted. This waveform data is analyzed by software algorithms within the sensor to determine systolic pressure and diastolic pressure.

The Wrist Automatic Blood Pressure Monitor consists of two parts: main unit and the wrist cuff. The main unit is mainly composed of pump, valve, PCB, enclosure and LCD. The cuff, which is applicable to wrist circumference approximately between 12.5 and 20.5cm, includes the inflatable bladder and the nylon shell.

This device adopts the oscillometric technology with Fuzzy Algorithm to measure the arterial blood pressure and pulse rate. The cuff is wrapped around the arm and automatically inflated by the air pump. The sensor of the device catches weak fluctuation of the pressure in the cuff produced by extension and contraction of the artery of the arm in response to each heartbeat. The amplitude of the pressure waves is measured, converted in millimeters of the mercury column, and is displayed by digital value.

This FDA 510(k) clearance letter pertains to three models of wrist automatic blood pressure monitors (LD-735, LD-752, LD-753) submitted by HONSUN (Nantong) Co.,Ltd. The clearance is based on the substantial equivalence of these devices to a legally marketed predicate device, the Wrist Automatic Blood Pressure Monitor LD-737 (K131463).

The primary focus of the submission and the FDA's review is on demonstrating that the new devices do not raise new issues of safety or effectiveness compared to the predicate. The document thoroughly compares the technical characteristics and functions of the subject devices to the predicate.

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

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

The document does not explicitly state "acceptance criteria" as a separate, quantitative set of thresholds for clinical performance that the device must meet in a specific study. Instead, the "acceptance criteria" appear to be implicit in the compliance with recognized standards and the declared measuring accuracy specification. The study performed is a non-clinical bench testing comparison to the predicate device and compliance with relevant safety and performance standards.

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

The document explicitly states that "bench testing" was conducted. However, it does not provide any details on the sample size used for this testing or the specific data provenance (e.g., country of origin, retrospective/prospective). The testing mentioned is primarily related to compliance with various electrical, EMC, and environmental standards, as well as biocompatibility. For measuring accuracy, the statement merely re-iterates the specification as being the same as the predicate, suggesting that this specification was verified during the "bench testing" rather than proven with a new clinical study.

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

The document does not mention any human experts establishing ground truth for the "test set." The evaluation appears to be based on engineering and laboratory testing for compliance with technical standards and comparison to the predicate device's specifications. This is a blood pressure monitor, not an AI/imaging diagnostic device that would typically require expert ground truth labeling.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set

Since no human experts were involved in establishing ground truth for a test set in the traditional sense (e.g., for diagnostic accuracy), there was no adjudication method described.

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 is applicable to this device. This is a standalone medical device (blood pressure monitor), not an AI-based diagnostic tool intended to assist human readers or clinicians.

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

The document outlines an assessment of non-clinical testing which included electrical safety, EMC, biocompatibility, and software verification/validation. The device itself is an "automatic blood pressure monitor," meaning its core function is to autonomously measure blood pressure. Therefore, the "bench testing" and compliance with standards like ISO 80601-2-30 (Particular requirements for the basic safety and essential performance of automated non-invasive sphygmomanometers) serve as the standalone performance evaluation for the device's accuracy and safety, without human intervention in the measurement process itself. The document states: "The performance tests demonstrate that the wrist automatic blood pressure monitor performs comparably to the predicate device that is currently marketed for the same intended use." This indicates a standalone performance assessment against established benchmarks (the predicate and relevant standards).

7. The Type of Ground Truth Used (Expert Consensus, Pathology, Outcomes Data, etc.)

For the primary function of blood pressure measurement accuracy, the ground truth is implicitly defined by the measurement standards provided in ISO 80601-2-30, which typically refers to reference measurements from a calibrated clinical-grade sphygmomanometer (e.g., mercury sphygmomanometer). For other aspects, the ground truth for compliance is the relevant international and national standards (e.g., ISO 10993 for biocompatibility, IEC 60601 series for electrical safety and EMC).

8. The Sample Size for the Training Set

Not applicable/Not mentioned. This device is a hardware-based blood pressure monitor using an "oscillometric method with Fuzzy Algorithm." While a "Fuzzy Algorithm" implies some form of computational processing, the document does not indicate that it is a machine learning or AI algorithm that requires a "training set" in the modern sense of deep learning or complex predictive modeling. The algorithm is a fixed part of the device's operation.

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

Not applicable/Not mentioned for the same reasons as #8. If the "Fuzzy Algorithm" involved a "training" or calibration phase during its development, the details are not provided in this regulatory document.

Ask a specific question about this device

Upper Arm Electronic Blood Pressure Monitor, Models FC-BP107, FC-BP123, FC-BP125, FC-BP126,FC-BP127, FC-BP116 are intended to measure the systolic and diastolic blood pressure and pulse rate of an adult individual by using a non-invasive technique in which an inflatable cuff is wrapped around the upper arm. The devices' features include irregular pulse rhythm detection during measurement, and will display a alert signal with the reading when irregular heartbeat is detected.

The subject device, Upper Arm Electronic Blood Pressure Monitor, is an automatic non-invasive blood pressure monitor which can be driven by 4 AA batteries / 4×AAA batteries or type-C USB (optional). It uses an inflatable cuff which is wrapped around the patient's upper arm to measure the systolic and diastolic blood pressure as well as the pulse rate of adult at household, not for neonate or pregnancy.

The unit uses the oscillometric method of blood pressure measurement. It means the unit detects the movement of your blood through your brachial artery, and converts your blood pressure into a digital reading. The unit is simple to use because a stethoscope is not needed while using an oscillometric monitor.

The unit stores the blood pressure and pulse rate in the memory after completing a measurement each time. 2x120 sets of measurement values can be stored automatically. The earliest record will be deleted automatically to save the latest measurement value when more than the measurement values. The unit also calculates an average reading based on the values of the latest 3 times measurement.

This blood pressure monitor has the function of blood pressure classification, which is convenient for you to judge whether your blood pressure is normal or not.

This blood pressure monitor has voice broadcast function. During measurement and recall the memory, there will be voice operation tips.

During blood pressure measurement, if the body moves excessively, the body motion detection icon will appear on the display.

Sleeve with self-check: Detects whether the cuff is worn correctly. If the pressure can exceed 30mmHg within 15 seconds, this Sleeve with self-check icon will light up.

During the blood pressure measurement decrease process, if a pulse wave is detected, this Pulse Detected Icon will flash at the same frequency as the peak of the pulse wave appears.

The device detects an Irregular HeartBeat (IRB) (a Heartbeat that is more than 25% slower or 25% faster from the average Heartbeat) two or more times during the measurement, the irregular heartbeat Symbol will appear on the display with the measurement values.

The device features a built-in "Bluetooth Data Transmission" function, which enables the device automatically transmit measuring results to paired Bluetooth-enabled device(except model FC-BP107).

There is a maximum pressure safety setting at 300 mmHg, when the pressure is more than 300mmHg, the device will exhaust fast automatically.

No operation for 2 minute the device will shut down automatically.

The device includes model FC-BP107, FC-BP123, FC-BP125, FC-BP126, FC-BP127, FC-BP116. Model FC-BP107 and FC-BP116 can be powered by internal battery (4×AA batteries, 6.0V DC) or Type-C port 5VDC 1A, other models can be powered by internal battery (4×AAA batteries, 6.0V DC) or Type-C port 5VDC 1A.

All models have same MCU, Air pump, Solenoid valve and blood pressure core algorithm except for PCB layout, Display screen, function of the Button, dimension and power supply.

The subject devices (FC-BP107, FC-BP123, FC-BP125, FC-BP126, FC-BP127, FC-BP116) and the predicate devices (FC-BP100, FC-BP101, FC-BP102, FC-BP110, FC-BP111, FC-BP112) share the same schematic, circuitry, critical components, and measurement algorithm.

For the differences between the subject device models, the differences are PCB layout difference (physical board shape and/or component arrangement differences), Display screen, function of the Button, dimension, and power supply.

These changes are mainly cosmetic and do not affect the electrical design, safety, or essential performance of the devices.

N/A

Ask a specific question about this device

Automatic Upper Arm Blood Pressure Monitor is intended for use by medical professionals or at home to monitor and display diastolic, systolic blood pressure and pulse rate on adult each time, with the cuff around the left upper arm according to the instruction in the user's guide manual.

Automatic Upper Arm Blood Pressure Monitor is designed to measure the systolic, diastolic and pulse rate of an individual by using a non-invasive technique which an inflatable cuff is wrapped around upper arm. Our method to define systolic and diastolic pressures is similar to the auscultatory method but using an electronic capacitive pressure sensor rather than stethoscope and mercury manometer. The sensor converts tiny alteration in cuff pressure to electrical signals; by analyzing those signals to define the systolic, diastolic and calculating pulse rate is a well-known technique in the market so called "oscillometric method". The device also has low voltage indication, which will be triggered when the battery is low.

The product includes Bluetooth transmission functionality which can connect to APP and transfer data for APP, and the measuring data, including systolic diastolic pressures and pulse rate can be displayed on APP. The APP can control the device measuring when connecting device.

There are 18 models and 2 types (Arm type and tunnel type). Arm type has models BA-831X, BA-832X, BA-833X, BA-837X, BA-838X, BA-842X, BA-843X, BA-845X, BA-847X, BA-849X, BA-851X, BA-852X, BA-855X. They are all the same except for appearance and buttons. Tunnel type has models BA-835, BA-836, BA-839, BA-840, BA-856. They are all the same except for appearance and cuff circumference. Arm type has cuff as accessory and there are 6 sizes, you can select suitable size according to your arm circumference.

The product provides 4 AA batteries or DC 6.0V adapter for power supply for power supply.

N/A

Ask a specific question about this device

The Upper Arm Automatic Digital Blood Pressure Monitor, Model BP Progress (BP3T01-1B) is a device intended to measure the systolic and diastolic blood pressure and pulse rate of an adult individual by using a non-invasive oscillometric technique in which an inflatable cuff is wrapped around the upper arm for a circumference range from 22 to 40cm. The device detects the appearance of irregular heartbeat during measurement and gives a warning signal with the reading once the irregular heartbeat is detected. The device can be used in connection with a smart phone via Bluetooth. The measurement data can be transferred to a smart phone running the Microlife Connected Health+ mobile software (App).

The Upper Arm Automatic Digital Blood Pressure Monitor, Model BP Progress (BP3T01-1B) is designed to measure systolic and diastolic blood pressure, pulse rate of an individual with arm circumference sizes ranging from 22 to 40 cm by using a non-invasive technique in which one inflatable cuff is wrapped around the single upper arm. Our method to define systolic and diastolic pressure is similar to the auscultatory method but using a semiconductor sensor rather than a stethoscope and mercury manometer. The sensor converts tiny alterations in cuff pressure to electrical signals, by analyzing those signals to define the systolic and diastolic blood pressure and calculating pulse rate, which is a well - known technique in the market called the "oscillometric method". The device detects the appearance of irregular heartbeat during measurement, and the symbol " " is displayed after the measurement. In addition, the device can be used in connection with smart mobile devices running the Microlife Connected Health+ mobile software (App) via Bluetooth. The blood pressure monitor is a fully automatic digital blood pressure measuring device use by adults on the upper arm at home.

The provided FDA 510(k) clearance letter and summary for the Microlife Upper Arm Automatic Digital Blood Pressure Monitor, Model BP Progress (BP3T01-1B), include information about its testing and equivalence to a predicate device. However, it does not contain explicit acceptance criteria thresholds (e.g., specific accuracy ranges for blood pressure measurements) or detailed results beyond stating that the device "met all relevant requirements" and "results were passing."

Based on the provided text, here's an attempt to extract the requested information, with notable gaps where details are not explicitly stated.

Acceptance Criteria and Study Details for Microlife Upper Arm Automatic Digital Blood Pressure Monitor, Model BP Progress (BP3T01-1B)

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

The document does not explicitly state numerical acceptance criteria for blood pressure accuracy (e.g., mean difference and standard deviation standards like those in ISO 81060-2). It only mentions that the device "met all relevant requirements" and "results were passing" according to the relevant standards.

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

• Sample Size: The document does not specify the exact sample size for the clinical validation study conducted in accordance with ISO 81060-2.
• Data Provenance: Not specified (e.g., country of origin, retrospective or prospective). Typically, such clinical validations are prospective, but this is not explicitly stated.

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

• The document does not provide details on the number or qualifications of experts used for establishing ground truth, as is typical for an oscillometric blood pressure monitor validation. For ISO 81060-2, readings are independently taken by multiple trained observers, but their specific qualifications (e.g., experience level) are not detailed here.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set

• The document does not explicitly state an adjudication method. For ISO 81060-2, the ground truth (reference blood pressure) is established by two or more trained observers using auscultation. Discrepancies between observers are typically handled by a predefined protocol (e.g., averaging, or a third observer if differences are significant), but these specifics are not mentioned in the provided text.

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

• No, an MRMC comparative effectiveness study was not done. This type of study (comparing human readers with and without AI assistance) is not relevant for a standalone blood pressure monitor. The device itself performs the measurement; it does not assist human readers in interpreting complex imagery or clinical data in the way an AI algorithm might.

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

• Yes, a standalone performance assessment was effectively done. The clinical validation conducted according to ISO 81060-2 assesses the device's accuracy in measuring blood pressure independently, without human interpretation other than setting up the device and initiating the measurement. The device's measurement algorithm is evaluated directly against a reference standard.

7. The Type of Ground Truth Used

• Expert Consensus (Auscultation): For blood pressure monitor validation per ISO 81060-2, the ground truth for blood pressure measurements is established through simultaneous or closely timed readings by trained human observers using the auscultatory method (stethoscope and sphygmomanometer/mercury manometer), which is considered the clinical reference standard.

8. The Sample Size for the Training Set

• Not Applicable / Not Provided: The summary indicates that the subject device (BP3T01-1B) uses the "same oscillometric method" and "common blood pressure measurement technological architecture and algorithm" as the predicate device (BP3KV1-5K). It does not describe a new algorithm that required a specific training set. Blood pressure algorithms for oscillometric devices are typically developed based on physiological models and empirical data, rather than being "trained" in the machine learning sense with a discrete "training set" in the context described here. If iterative development was done, the size of data used for such development is not provided.

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

• Not Applicable / Not Provided: As in point 8, the concept of a "training set" with established ground truth as it applies to machine learning models is not explicitly relevant or described for this blood pressure monitor's algorithm development in the provided documentation. The algorithm's fundamental principles are stated to be the same as the predicate device, implying established and verified methods rather than a newly trained model requiring specific ground truth for training.

Ask a specific question about this device

Fully Automatic Electronic Blood Pressure Monitor is for use by medical professionals or at home and is a non-invasive blood pressure measurement system intended to measure the diastolic and systolic blood pressures and pulse rate of an adult individual by using a non-invasive technique in which an inflatable cuff is wrapped around the upper arm. The cuff circumference is limited to 15cm-48cm (approx. 5.9"-18.9").

Fully Automatic Electronic Blood Pressure Monitor (BP-300C, BP-300CV, BP-300V, BPM1, BPX1, KD-338N, KD-553, KD-557BR, KD-558, KD-558BR, KD-595, KD-5031N, KD-5810, KD-5810B, KD-5811, KD-5811A, KD-5811V, KD-5815, KD-5920, KD-5920L, KD-5920TL, KD-5923, KN-550LT) is designed and manufactured according to IEC 80601-2-30.

The operational principle is based on Oscillo-metric and silicon integrates pressure sensor technology. It can calculate the systolic and diastolic blood pressure and display the result. The measurements results can also be classified by the function of blood pressure classification indicator. If any irregular heartbeat is detected, it can be shown to the user.

The provided document is a 510(k) clearance letter for various blood pressure monitors. It outlines the regulatory approval process and compares the new devices to a predicate device. However, it does not contain the detailed acceptance criteria and study results in the format typically used for AI/software devices.

Specifically, this document describes validation against standards for medical electrical equipment (IEC 60601-1, IEC 60601-1-2, IEC 60601-1-11) and automated non-invasive sphygmomanometers (IEC 80601-2-30, ISO 81060-2). It focuses on the substantial equivalence of the physical blood pressure monitors and their underlying oscillometric and pressure sensor technology, rather than the performance of an AI algorithm based on a test set, ground truth, and expert interpretations.

Therefore, many of the specific questions about AI/software device validation (e.g., sample size for the test set, data provenance, number of experts for ground truth, MRMC studies, standalone performance, training set details) cannot be answered from this document.

However, I can extract information related to the performance of the blood pressure monitors themselves, based on the included standards.

Acceptance Criteria and Device Performance (for Blood Pressure Monitor functionality, not AI):

Since this is a blood pressure monitor, the primary performance criteria relate to its accuracy in measuring blood pressure and pulse rate, and compliance with relevant safety and performance standards for automated non-invasive sphygmomanometers.

Unable to Answer from Document (Common for AI/Software Device Submissions, but not for this type of device):

The following questions are not applicable or cannot be answered from this 510(k) summary because the device described is a physical blood pressure monitor, not an AI/software device that interprets medical images or other complex data requiring expert adjudication, training sets, or MRMC studies.

• Sample size used for the test set and the data provenance:
  • Test Set Size: "A total of 231 patients (107 males and 124 females) were enrolled in the study." This is the clinical study population for blood pressure measurement accuracy.
  • Data Provenance: Not explicitly stated (e.g., country of origin). The study is described as a "clinical study," which implies prospective data collection for the purpose of the study.
• 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 applicable. Ground truth for blood pressure measurement is established through a standard auscultation method (manual measurement by medical professionals using a stethoscope and sphygmomanometer), not by interpretation of images by experts.
• Adjudication method (e.g. 2+1, 3+1, none) for the test set:
  • Not applicable. Ground truth is direct measurement by a reference method.
• If a multi reader multi case (MRMC) comparative effectiveness study was done, If so, what was the effect size of how much human readers improve with AI vs without AI assistance:
  • Not applicable. This is not an AI-assisted diagnostic device.
• If a standalone (i.e. algorithm only without human-in-the-loop performance) was done:
  • The device is a standalone blood pressure monitor. No human-in-the-loop interaction for interpretation (as in AI devices) is relevant. Its performance is its direct measurement accuracy.
• The type of ground truth used (expert consensus, pathology, outcomes data, etc.):
  • Ground Truth: "Standard auscultation method was used as the reference blood pressure monitor measuring." This is the established clinical standard for direct comparison.
• The sample size for the training set:
  • Not applicable. This is not an AI/machine learning device requiring a training set.
• How the ground truth for the training set was established:
  • Not applicable.

Ask a specific question about this device

The indications for use of the BeneVision Central Monitoring System include:

• Real time viewing of patient clinical data and alarms from compatible physiological monitors. Viewing of non-real time patient clinical data of compatible anesthesia devices (i.e. not indicated for real-time monitoring of clinical data of compatible anesthesia devices).

• Storage and Historical review of patient clinical data and alarms from compatible physiological monitor, and anesthesia devices.

• Printing patient data from compatible physiological monitor, and anesthesia devices.

• Configuration of local settings as well as synchronizing settings across the network to remote compatible physiological monitors.

• Transfer of patient clinical data and settings between several CentralStations.

• Provides a Resting 12 Lead interpretation of previously stored data.

The BeneVision Central Monitoring System is a networked patient monitoring system intended for use in a fixed location, installed in professional healthcare facilities to provide clinicians remote patient monitoring. The network connections between the various devices can be any combination of Ethernet (Wired), Wireless WIFI (WLAN), and Wireless WMTS.

The BeneVision Central Monitoring System supports one or more Mindray compatible physiological monitors, anesthesia systems and will display, store, print, and transfer information received from the compatible monitors, anesthesia systems.

The telemetry monitoring systems are designed to acquire and monitor physiological data for ambulating patients within a defined coverage area. The BeneVision Central Monitoring System supports Telemetry Systems: TMS-6016, Telepack-608, TMS60, TM80, and TM70.

• The TMS-6016 transmitter is intended for use on Adult and Pediatric patients to monitor ECG and SpO2 physiological data.

• The Panorama Telepack-608 transmitter is intended for use on Adult patients to monitor ECG and SpO2 physiological data.

• The TMS60 transmitter is intended for use on Adult and Pediatric patients over three years old to monitor ECG, SpO2, NIBP and Resp physiological data. The physiological data can be reviewed locally on the display of the transmitter. The CentralStation will support ECG, Heart Rate, SpO2, NIBP, Resp, Pulse Rate, Arrhythmia analysis, QT monitoring, and ST Segment Analysis for the TMS60.

• The TM80/TM70 telemetry monitor is intended for use on Adult and Pediatric patients over three years old to monitor ECG, SpO2, NIBP and Resp physiological data. The physiological data can be analyzed, alarmed, stored, reviewed locally on the display of the monitor, and the CentralStation can config and display the physiological parameters from the TM80/TM70.

The BeneVision Central Monitoring System is intended for use in professional healthcare facilities under the direct supervision of a licensed healthcare practitioner.

The BeneVision Central Monitoring System (CMS) is a networked patient monitoring system intended for use in healthcare settings by, or under the direction of, a physician to provide clinicians remote patient monitoring. The target patient population is adult patients and pediatrics.

When connected to a compatible anesthesia device, BeneVision CMS can display the parameters, waveforms and alarms of the anesthesia device. The device does not contain bi-directional capabilities for the compatible anesthesia devices.

The BeneVision CMS includes the AlarmGUARD application. AlarmGUARD supports delivering notifications of physiological and technical alarms to clinical professionals' mobile devices. AlarmGUARD is not intended for real time monitoring of patients and is not intended to act as a primary source for alarms.

It appears the provided FDA 510(k) clearance letter and summary for the BeneVision Central Monitoring System (K242728) does not contain specific acceptance criteria, test results (like sensitivity/specificity, accuracy metrics), or detailed study methodologies that directly address how the device's performance meets quantitative acceptance criteria for its intended functions.

The document primarily focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence to a predicate device (K220058) through:

• Comparison of Indications for Use: Showing minor differences (expanded compatibility to include anesthesia systems, but not for real-time monitoring).
• Technological Comparisons: Highlighting changes in operating systems, host configurations, and the addition of features like Multi-Patient Viewer separation and AlarmGUARD support.
• Performance Data Section: This section lists the types of testing conducted but does not provide the results of those tests or specific acceptance criteria met by those results. It merely states that "Software verification and validation testing was conducted" and "Verification of the BeneVision Central Monitoring System was conducted to ensure that the product works as designed. Validation was conducted to check the design and performance of the product."

Therefore, based solely on the provided text, I cannot extract the detailed information requested in your prompt regarding acceptance criteria, reported performance, sample sizes, expert qualifications, adjudication methods, MRMC studies, standalone performance, or training set details.

The document confirms the following regarding the study:

• Study Type: Software verification and validation testing, along with specific bench testing.
• Clinical Data/Animal Testing: Not applicable/not required for this submission to establish substantial equivalence. This suggests the clearance relies on non-clinical data and comparison to the predicate.
• Ground Truth: The document implies that the ground truth for software verification and validation would be the design specifications and expected behavior of the system, rather than clinical outcomes or expert consensus on a diagnostic task. For the "Waveform Display Accuracy from compatible Anesthesia Machine," the ground truth would likely be the direct output from the anesthesia machine itself.

What is present in the document that somewhat relates to your request:

• "Bench Testing" section (Page 19): This lists specific tests performed:
  • AlarmGUARD IEC 60601-2-27
  • AlarmGUARD IEC 60601-1-8
  • AlarmGUARD Human Factors
  • Waveform Display Accuracy from compatible Anesthesia Machine

To fulfill your request as best as possible with the given information, I will have to state that many details are explicitly absent from this public 510(k) summary.

Here's a structured response based on the provided document, indicating what information is present and what is absent:

Device Acceptance Criteria and Performance Study Summary (K242728)

Based on the provided FDA 510(k) Clearance Letter and Summary, detailed quantitative acceptance criteria and specific performance metrics (like accuracy, sensitivity, specificity) for the BeneVision Central Monitoring System are not explicitly presented. The submission primarily relies on demonstrating substantial equivalence to a predicate device (K220058) through verification and validation of software and specific bench testing.

The document states that "Software verification and validation testing was conducted and documentation was provided as recommended by FDA's Guidance 'Content of Premarket Submissions for Device Software Functions: Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff'." It also mentions that "Verification of the BeneVision Central Monitoring System was conducted to ensure that the product works as designed. Validation was conducted to check the design and performance of the product."

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

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

• Test Set Sample Size: Not specified in the provided document for any of the listed tests (AlarmGUARD, Waveform Display Accuracy, general software V&V).
• Data Provenance: Not specified (e.g., country of origin, retrospective/prospective). Given that no clinical data was used or required, the "data" would be synthetic, simulated, or derived from direct device connections during bench testing.

3. Number of Experts and Qualifications for Ground Truth

• Not applicable / Not specified. The document does not describe the use of human experts to establish ground truth for a diagnostic task or for the performance evaluation of this central monitoring system. The focus is on software function and electro-mechanical performance validation against design specifications and international standards.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set

• Not applicable / Not specified. No adjudication method is mentioned as human reader input for a test set is not described.

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

• No. The document explicitly states that "Clinical testing is not required to establish substantial equivalence to the predicate device" and does not mention any MRMC study. This device is a central monitoring system displaying physiological data, not an AI diagnostic tool requiring MRMC studies for improved human reader performance.

6. Standalone Performance (Algorithm Only)

• The "performance data" section lists "Software Verification and Validation Testing" and "Bench Testing" (including "Waveform Display Accuracy from compatible Anesthesia Machine"). These tests conceptually represent 'standalone' performance in that they evaluate the device's technical functions directly. However, no specific quantitative standalone performance metrics (e.g., classification accuracy, sensitivity, specificity for any internal algorithms) are provided in this summary beyond the statement that v&v was conducted to ensure the product "works as designed."

7. Type of Ground Truth Used

• The ground truth for the device's performance appears to be:
  • Design Specifications: For general software verification and validation.
  • External Reference Standards/Simulators: For tests like "Waveform Display Accuracy" (e.g., comparing the displayed waveform to the known, true signal generated by a simulator or the anesthesia machine itself).
  • International Standards: For AlarmGUARD functionality (e.g., IEC 60601-2-27, IEC 60601-1-8).

8. The Sample Size for the Training Set

• Not applicable / Not specified. This document describes a traditional medical device (patient monitoring system software) rather than a machine learning/AI device that typically requires a distinct "training set." Therefore, no training set size is mentioned.

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

• Not applicable / Not specified. As no training set for an AI/ML model is indicated, there is no mention of how its ground truth would be established.

Ask a specific question about this device

ArteVu is intended to noninvasively and continuously measure a patient's blood pressure and pulse rate, which are derived from the pulse pressure waveform using the scientific method of pulse waveform decomposition, for use on adult patients aged between 50 and 86 years who are resting in a supine or similarly reclined position.

ArteVu is calibrated using an ISO 81060-2 compliant sphygmomanometer. All parameters derived by ArteVu are shown on a compatible remote display monitor (RDDS) via wired transmission. The device is intended for use by clinicians or other properly trained medical personnel in professional healthcare facilities.

ArteVu is an automatic, continuous, and non-invasive blood pressure (CNBP) monitoring system designed for adult patients at rest and intended for use by medical professionals. The device features a disposable Finger Clip containing a tactile sensor that detects pulse pressure waveforms at the fingertip. ArteVu utilizes the scientific method of pulse waveform decomposition to derive blood pressure and pulse rate, with initial calibration performed using a non-invasive upper arm cuff. These measurements are displayed on a compatible remote monitor, updated every two seconds via wired transmission. ArteVu incorporates technical and physiological alarms to enhance reliability, providing continuous and accurate monitoring while alerting users to abnormal conditions.

The provided FDA 510(k) clearance letter for ArteVu does not contain the detailed information necessary to fully answer all aspects of your request regarding acceptance criteria and the study proving the device meets these criteria. Specifically, it lacks a table of acceptance criteria with reported device performance metrics and explicit details on how ground truth was established for training and testing sets.

However, based on the information available, here's a structured response addressing the requested points to the best of what the document provides:

Acceptance Criteria and Study for ArteVu

The document states that ArteVu's safety and effectiveness were validated through a clinical study that adhered to the acceptance criteria of ISO 81060-2 for substantial equivalence to the predicate device, CareTaker4. It also incorporated elements from IEEE 1708, ISO 81060-3, ISO 80601-2-61, and IEC 60601-2-27. While it doesn't provide a specific table of numerical acceptance criteria or reported values for ArteVu, it implicitly relies on the standards set by ISO 81060-2 for non-invasive sphygmomanometers. This standard typically defines accuracy requirements for blood pressure measurements.

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

The document does not provide an explicit table with numerical acceptance criteria and ArteVu's reported performance metrics against those criteria. It only states that the study design "adhered to the acceptance criteria of ISO 81060-2."

If this were a complete submission, such a table would typically include:

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

• Sample Size for Test Set: 109 subjects. The document states, "ArteVu's safety and effectiveness have been validated through a clinical study conducted in Taiwan involving 109 subjects." Since this is the primary validation study mentioned, it serves as the test set for the device's performance claims.
• Data Provenance: The clinical study was "conducted in Taiwan." The data is prospective, as it was collected as part of a clinical study to validate the device.
• Subject Recruitment: Subjects were recruited from "operating rooms and intensive care units."

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

The document states that ArteVu is calibrated using an "ISO 81060-2 compliant sphygmomanometer" and that the study design "adhered to the acceptance criteria of ISO 81060-2." This strongly implies that the ground truth for blood pressure measurements was established using a reference standard device (the compliant sphygmomanometer) and not necessarily by a panel of human experts. Therefore, the concept of "number of experts" for establishing ground truth via consensus (as might be seen in image-based AI studies) does not directly apply here. The "experts" would be the clinical personnel performing the reference measurements according to the ISO standard.

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

Since the ground truth for blood pressure measurements in this context is established by a reference device (ISO 81060-2 compliant sphygmomanometer) and not by subjective interpretation of medical images or conditions by multiple human readers, a numerical adjudication method (like 2+1 or 3+1) is not applicable or mentioned. The accuracy of the sphygmomanometer itself is the standard.

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 comparative effectiveness study was not done as described in the document. This type of study is commonly used for AI in diagnostic imaging (e.g., radiology) where AI assists human interpretation. ArteVu is a continuous non-invasive blood pressure monitoring system, so its primary function is measurement, not assisting human readers in interpreting complex medical data.
• Therefore, there is no mention of effect size related to human readers improving with or without AI assistance.

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

• Yes, in essence, a standalone performance assessment was conducted for the device's core function. ArteVu is described as an "automatic, continuous, and non-invasive blood pressure (CNBP) monitoring system." Its performance (accuracy against a reference standard) is evaluated directly, implying it operates as an algorithm determining BP from the pulse waveform. The clinical study validated the device's ability to "achieve comparable safety and effectiveness" to the predicate device, which is a standalone measurement. While it displays measurements for "clinicians or other properly trained medical personnel," the core measurement derivation is done by the device itself, making it a standalone function in terms of its output.

7. The type of ground truth used

• The primary ground truth used is a reference standard measurement from an ISO 81060-2 compliant sphygmomanometer. This standard specifies the requirements for non-invasive sphygmomanometers and their clinical validation. The document explicitly states, "ArteVu is calibrated using an ISO 81060-2 compliant sphygmomanometer" and that the "study design adhered to the acceptance criteria of ISO 81060-2."

8. The sample size for the training set

• The document does not specify the sample size for the training set used to develop or train the ArteVu algorithm. The 109 subjects mentioned are for the validation/test set. Typical 510(k) summaries often do not disclose detailed training set information unless it's critical to the novelty or specific performance claims of an AI/ML device. While ArteVu uses a "scientific method of pulse waveform decomposition," it's unclear if this involves a machine learning model that requires a dedicated training set as opposed to an algorithm based on established physiological models.

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

• Since the training set size is not provided, the method for establishing its ground truth is also not described in this document. If ArteVu's algorithm involved machine learning, it's highly probable that similar methods (i.e., reference standard measurements from compliant sphygmomanometers) would have been used for training data as for the test data.

Ask a specific question about this device

The monitors are intended to be used for monitoring, storing, recording, and reviewing of, and to generate alarms for, multiple physiological parameters of adults and pediatrics (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), and cardiac output (C.O.).

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

The NIBP monitoring supports iCUFS algorithm and iFAST algorithm. The iCUFS algorithm is intended for adult, pediatric and neonatal patients. The iFAST algorithm is intended for adult and pediatric 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 CX&UX series Patient Monitor including CX10/CX12/CX15/UX10/UX12/UX15 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.

Minor differences from the predicate device are limited to some modifications of monitoring parameter specifications. These updates do not change the fundamental scientific technology of the cleared predicate device and thus do not raise any questions about the safety and effectiveness of the subject device.

The provided FDA 510(k) clearance letter details the device's technical specifications and comparisons to predicate devices, along with the non-clinical performance data and adherence to various IEC and ISO standards. However, it explicitly states: "Clinical data: The subject device did not require new clinical studies to support substantial equivalence."

This means that the submission for this Patient Monitor device (CX10, CX12, CX15, UX10, UX12, UX15) relies on demonstrating substantial equivalence to a legally marketed predicate device (Edan Instruments, Inc., Patient Monitor Model iX10, iX12, iX15, K232962) through non-clinical performance testing and software verification/validation, rather than new clinical trials or studies involving human patients.

Therefore, the requested information regarding acceptance criteria and studies that prove the device meets acceptance criteria through clinical performance (e.g., sample size for test set, expert involvement, MRMC studies, ground truth establishment for test/training sets, effect size of human reader improvement with AI) cannot be extracted from this document, as such clinical studies were explicitly not required for this 510(k) submission.

The document focuses on demonstrating that the new device's technical specifications and performance are similar to the predicate device, and that it complies with relevant safety and performance standards through bench testing.

Here's what can be extracted from the provided text regarding acceptance criteria and the type of study performed, specifically focusing on the non-clinical aspects:

Device: Patient Monitor (CX10, CX12, CX15, UX10, UX12, UX15)

The acceptance criteria for this device are implicitly tied to its performance meeting the standards and accuracy specifications of the predicate device and relevant international standards. Since no new clinical studies were conducted, the "proof" comes from non-clinical bench testing and software validation.

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance (Non-Clinical/Bench Testing)

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

• Sample Size: Not applicable in terms of human subjects or patient data test sets, as "new clinical studies" were not required. The "test set" refers to bench testing and functional system-level validation. The specific number of test cycles or a detailed breakdown of test cases for bench testing is not provided in this summary.
• Data Provenance: The data primarily originates from Edan Instruments Inc. (Shenzhen, Guangdong, China) through internal engineering and quality assurance processes for non-clinical bench testing and software validation. It is not patient data, so concepts like "retrospective or prospective" do not apply.

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

• Not applicable for clinical ground truth: Since no clinical studies were performed requiring human interpretation or diagnosis for a test set, no medical experts (e.g., radiologists) were used to establish ground truth in this context.
• Internal experts: Bench testing and software validation would have involved engineers and quality assurance professionals, whose qualifications are implicit in the quality system (21 CFR Part 820) but not specified in detail here.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set:

• Not applicable: Adjudication methods (e.g., 2+1, 3+1) are relevant for clinical studies involving multiple readers. This was not a clinical study. Bench testing relies on established technical specifications and standard compliance.

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

• No: No MRMC study was performed as no new clinical studies were required or conducted. Therefore, there's no effect size of human readers improving with AI assistance. The device is a patient monitor, not an AI-assisted diagnostic tool.

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

• Yes (for the technical components): The "performance testing-Bench" effectively represents a standalone evaluation of the device's functional components (ECG, NIBP, SpO2, etc.) and software against defined technical specifications and standards. The "software verification and validation testing" also represents a standalone evaluation of the algorithm and software functions. The specific algorithms (e.g., iCUFS, iFAST for NIBP, arrhythmia analysis logic) are tested independently for their accuracy against known inputs or reference standards as part of bench testing.

7. The Type of Ground Truth Used:

• Technical/Reference Standards: For the bench testing, the "ground truth" would be derived from:
  • Reference standards/simulators: Calibrated medical equipment, physiological simulators, and test signals (e.g., known ECG waveforms, simulated blood pressure readings, temperature standards) are used to provide the "true" values against which the device's measurements are compared.
  • Defined specifications: The device's internal design specifications and the requirements of the referenced IEC/ISO standards serve as the "ground truth" for compliance testing.
• Not clinical ground truth: No expert consensus, pathology, or outcomes data from real patients were used for establishing ground truth for this submission.

8. The Sample Size for the Training Set:

• Not applicable: The device is a patient monitor, not a machine learning/AI algorithm that typically undergoes a distinct "training" phase with a large dataset. Its functionality is based on established physiological measurement principles and programmed algorithms. Any internal calibration or algorithm refinement would be part of the product development process, not a dedicated "training set" in the AI/ML sense.

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

• Not applicable: As there was no "training set" in the context of an AI/ML model, the concept of establishing ground truth for it does not apply to this 510(k) submission.

In summary, this 510(k) clearance relies on demonstrating that the new Patient Monitor is substantially equivalent to a previously cleared predicate device, primarily through robust non-clinical bench testing and software validation, proving compliance with established medical device standards and functional specifications. No new clinical studies with patient data were required or conducted for this specific submission.

Ask a specific question about this device