Search Results
Found 4 results
510(k) Data Aggregation
(190 days)
Fort Detrick, Maryland 21702
Re: K233249
Trade/Device Name: APPRAISE-HRI Regulation Number: 21 CFR 870.2220
|
| Classification Regulation: | 21.CFR.870.2220
|
| Classification Regulation: | 21.CFR.870.2220
The APPRAISE-HRI is a mobile health app intended to provide a means for military healthcare providers to screen U.S. Service members for hemorrhage risk after a physically traumatic event and stratify casualties who need immediate attention and emergency evacuation from those who are injured but may not be at risk for hemorrhage.
The APPRAISE-HRI is not intended to diagnose or direct treatment. Rather, it is intended to provide situational awareness and inform clinical management of potentially hemorrhagic casualties by identifying those at the greatest risk of hemorrhage.
The Automated Processing of the Physiological Registry for Assessment of Injury Severity (APPRAISE)-Hemorrhage Risk Index (HRI) is an Android application developed by the U.S. Army Medical Research and Development Command (USAMRDC) that uses vital-sign data collected from a trauma patient to provide a risk score that stratifies the patient's risk of hemorrhage. When the application runs, heart rate (HR), systolic blood pressure (SBP), and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) vital-sign data are collected from an external monitor [currently only the ZOLL Propaq M (K202375) is supported]. The ZOLL Propaq M monitor connects via Bluetooth with the Android platform running the APPRAISE-HRI application. The APPRAISE-HRI application continuously pulls data from the ZOLL Propaq M monitor to gather the required vital signs (HR, SBP, and DBP) and then runs the hemorrhage risk stratification algorithm to generate an output every one minute.
Once the vital-sign data from the ZOLL Propaq M monitor are transferred, the APPRAISE-HRI provides a stratification of hemorrhage into three Risk Level categories: Low (I), Average (II), or High (II). The APPRAISE-HRI application continuously displays both the input vital signs (HR, SBP, and DBP) and the Risk Level score to the caregiver to provide situational awareness and to inform clinical management of potentially hemorrhagic casualties by identifying those at the greatest risk of hemorrhage.
Here's a summary of the acceptance criteria and study details for the APPRAISE-HRI device, based on the provided document:
Acceptance Criteria and Device Performance
Acceptance Criterion | Reported Device Performance (Likelihood Ratio [95% CI]) | Interpretation |
---|---|---|
HRI Level I Effectiveness | $\leq$ 0.20 (at least 5 times less likely for hemorrhage patients) | 0.18 [0.12, 0.26] |
HRI Level II Effectiveness | Value close to 1 (almost as likely for hemorrhage patients as for control patients) | 0.70 [0.63, 0.76] |
HRI Level III Effectiveness | $\geq$ 5.00 (at least 5 times more likely for hemorrhage patients) | 6.88 [6.04, 7.84] |
Note: The acceptance criteria were success criteria focusing on the device effectively and consistently differentiating between HRI Levels I, II, and III, and the ground truth for trauma patients tracking consistently with the algorithm results. The specific numerical targets for the Likelihood Ratios are derived from the interpretation in the document where "at least five times less likely," "almost as likely," and "nearly seven times more likely" were stated.
Study Details
Feature | Description |
---|---|
Test Set Sample Size | 5,895 patients (543 Hemorrhage Patients, 5,352 Control Patients) |
Test Set Data Provenance | Country of origin: Not explicitly stated, but collected from eight sites during patient transport and one hospital's Emergency Department within the context of a U.S. Army Medical Research and Development Command (USAMRDC) study. This implies a U.S. military-affiliated or broader U.S. patient population. |
Retrospective/Prospective: "prospectively, retrospectively" design, meaning it prospectively validated the device using retrospectively collected vital-sign data. | |
Number of Experts for Ground Truth | Not specified. |
Qualifications of Experts | Not specified. |
Adjudication Method | Not specified. |
MRMC Comparative Effectiveness Study | No. The study did not involve human readers comparing performance with and without AI assistance. Instead, it evaluated the standalone performance of the algorithm against established ground truth. |
Standalone Performance | Yes. The clinical utility study directly evaluated the performance of the APPRAISE-HRI algorithm (standalone) in stratifying hemorrhage risk. |
Type of Ground Truth | Clinical Trauma Registry Data: Information included blood transfusion details, documented hemorrhagic injuries, clinical notes, International Classification of Disease 10th Revision (ICD-10) codes, and Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) codes. Patients were labeled as "Hemorrhage" or "Control" based on these data. |
Training Set Sample Size | Not specified in the provided document. |
Training Set Ground Truth Establishment | Not specified in the provided document. |
Ask a specific question about this device
(79 days)
300 Alexandria, Virginia 22314
Re: K221203
Trade/Device Name: AHI System Regulation Number: 21 CFR 870.2220
Classification Name | Adjunctive Hemodynamic Indicator With Decision Point |
| Regulation Number | 870.2220
The AHI System is intended for use by healthcare professionals managing patients 18 years or older who are receiving continuous physiological monitoring with electrocardiography (ECG) in hospitals.
AHI provides a frequently updated binary output over time based on pattern analysis of a lead-II ECG waveform intended to describe a patient's hemodynamic status and indicate if a patient is showing signs of hemodynamic stability or instability. Signs of hemodynamic instability (HI) are defined as hypotension (systolic blood pressure
The AHI System is a multiparameter system designed to meet clinicians' need to identify patient hemodynamic status and predict patient hemodynamic instability episodes using two analytics:1. Analytic for Hemodynamic Instability (AHI): Utilizing data from a single existing lead of a non-invasive electrocardiograph (ECG), AH analyzes heart rate variability (HRV) and ECG morphology features to rapidly detect signs of hemodynamic stability and categorize each window of data as either "AHI Stable" or "AHI Unstable." Time trending of AHI outputs is also provided.
- Analytic for Hemodynamic Instability Predictive Indicator (AH-P); Utilizing AH outputs from up to the most recent 30 minutes of EG data, AH-PI indicates the likelihood of a future episode of hemodynamic instability, defined as ten continuous minutes or more where signs of hemodynamic instability are present.
The provided text details the FDA clearance for the AHI System (v 2.2.0) and references a previous version (K212219) as the predicate device. However, the document primarily focuses on regulatory approval and equivalence, not on a detailed study proving the device meets specific acceptance criteria with performance metrics, sample sizes, expert qualifications, or ground truth establishment.
Therefore, many of the requested details about the study proving the device meets acceptance criteria are not present in the provided text. The text only vaguely refers to "Software: Software verification and validation testing were conducted and documentation was provided... Testing was conducted to ensure the AHI System works as designed." This is insufficient to populate the requested table and further study details.
Based on the provided text, here's what can be extracted and what is missing:
1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance
The provided text does not include a table of acceptance criteria or reported device performance metrics such as sensitivity, specificity, or AUC for the AHI System (v 2.2.0) or its predicate. It only states the device "works as designed" following software V&V.
2. Sample Size Used for the Test Set and Data Provenance
The provided text does not specify the sample size used for any test set or the provenance (e.g., country of origin, retrospective/prospective) of the data.
3. Number of Experts Used to Establish Ground Truth and Their Qualifications
The provided text does not mention the number or qualifications of experts used to establish ground truth for any test set.
4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set
The provided text does not describe any adjudication method (e.g., 2+1, 3+1, none) for a test set.
5. Multi-Reader Multi-Case (MRMC) Comparative Effectiveness Study
The provided text does not indicate that an MRMC comparative effectiveness study was done, nor does it provide any effect size for human reader improvement with or without AI assistance.
6. Standalone Performance Study
While the device's function (AHI and AHI-PI) is described as "pattern analysis of a lead-II ECG waveform" to indicate hemodynamic status and predict instability, the document does not provide the results of a standalone (algorithm only) performance study with specific metrics. It states "Testing was conducted to ensure the AHI System works as designed," which is a high-level statement without data.
7. Type of Ground Truth Used for the Test Set
The "Signs of hemodynamic instability (HI)" are defined within the Indications for Use as "hypotension (systolic blood pressure
Ask a specific question about this device
(140 days)
300 Alexandria, Virginia 22314
Re: K212219
Trade/Device Name: AHI System Regulation Number: 21 CFR 870.2220
Hemodynamic Indicator |
| Classification Name | 21 CFR 870.2220
The AHI System is intended for use by healthcare professionals managing patients 18 years or older who are receiving continuous physiological monitoring with electrocardiography (ECG) in hospitals.
AHI provides a frequently updated binary output over time based on pattern analysis of a lead-II ECG waveform intended to describe a patient's hemodynamic status and indicate if a patient is showing signs of hemodynamic stability or instability. Signs of hemodynamic instability (HI) are defined as hypotension (systolic blood pressure
The AHI System is a multiparameter system designed to meet clinicians' need to identify patient hemodynamic status and predict patient hemodynamic instability episodes using two analytics:
-
Analytic for Hemodynamic Instability (AHI) (as granted in DEN200022): Utilizing data from a single existing lead of a non-invasive electrocardiograph (ECG), AHI analyzes heart rate variability (HRV) and ECG morphology features to rapidly detect signs of hemodynamic stability or instability and categorize each window of data as either "AHI Stable" or "AHI Unstable." Time trending of AHI outputs is also provided.
-
Analytic for Hemodynamic Instability Predictive Indicator (AHI-PI): Utilizing AHI outputs from up to the most recent 30 minutes of ECG data, AHI-PI indicates the likelihood of a future episode of hemodynamic instability, defined as ten continuous minutes or more where signs of hemodynamic instability are present.
Here's a breakdown of the acceptance criteria and the study proving the device meets them, based on the provided text:
1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance
Acceptance Criteria | Reported Device Performance (AHI-PI) |
---|---|
Distinguish Risk Levels for Hemodynamic Instability | Probability of HI in next 1 hour: |
- Low Risk (Green): 0.7% (CI: 0.4%, 1.3%)
- Moderate Risk (Yellow): 6.5% (CI: 3.7%, 10.3%)
- High Risk (Red): 35.9% (CI: 28.1%, 44.0%) |
| Likelihood of HI compared to Low Risk | - Moderate Risk: 9x more likely to have an episode of HI in the next 1 hour than Low Risk. - High Risk: 51x more likely to have an episode of HI in the next 1 hour than Low Risk. |
| Prediction of patient deterioration (among those who had HI) | 89% of cases correctly predicted. |
| Lead Time for Prediction | Median lead time of 48 minutes. |
| Clinical Benefit | Demonstrate significant discrimination between risk of future hemodynamic instability events, providing adjunctive information to clinicians to facilitate fewer missed diagnoses of emerging HI/patient deterioration. |
2. Sample Size Used for the Test Set and Data Provenance
- Sample Size: 65,969 "windows" (data points representing a period of time for which an AHI-PI indicator was generated). The exact number of patients is not explicitly stated, but the note mentions: "The unit of analysis here is at the windows level and not the patient level." The study used bootstrapping to account for multiple measurements per subject.
- Data Provenance: Prospectively collected from consecutive patients at Michigan Medicine. This indicates the data is from the United States and is prospective.
- Targeted Patient Population: Hospitalized patients 18 years or older who are receiving continuous physiological monitoring with electrocardiography (ECG) and are not contraindicated. Due to study design considerations, the primary study population was limited to patients who were invasively monitored with an arterial line.
3. Number of Experts Used to Establish the Ground Truth for the Test Set and Qualifications of Those Experts
- The document does not mention the use of experts to establish the ground truth for the test set.
4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set
- The document does not mention an adjudication method for the 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
- No MRMC comparative effectiveness study is mentioned for the AHI-PI system. The study focuses on the standalone performance of the AHI-PI algorithm. The device is intended for "adjunctive use" meaning it supports human healthcare professionals, but specific studies on human improvement with AI assistance are not described here.
6. If a Standalone (i.e., algorithm only without human-in-the-loop performance) was done
- Yes, a standalone performance study was done for the AHI-PI. The reported data in the table directly reflects the algorithm's ability to predict hemodynamic instability without human intervention in the prediction process itself. The study compared AHI-PI outputs to a vital signs reference standard.
7. The Type of Ground Truth Used (expert consensus, pathology, outcomes data, etc.)
- Outcomes Data/Physiological Reference Standard: The ground truth for hemodynamic instability (HI) was defined using a "hemodynamic vital signs reference standard" based on continuous vital signs:
- Hypotension (systolic blood pressure
Ask a specific question about this device
(332 days)
NEW REGULATION NUMBER: 21 CFR 870.2220
CLASSIFICATION: Class II
PRODUCT CODE: QNV
BACKGROUND
Device Type: Adjunctive hemodynamic indicator with decision point Class: II Regulation Number: 21 CFR 870.2220
The Analytic for Hemodynamic Instability (AHI) software is intended for use by healthcare professionals managing in-hospital patients 18 years or older who are receiving continuous physiological monitoring with electrocardiography (ECG).
AHI provides a frequently undated binary output over time based on pattern analysis of a lead-II ECG waveform intended to describe a patient's hemodynamic status and indicate if a patient is showing signs of hemodynamic stability or instability. Signs of hemodynamic instability are defined as hypotension (systolic blood pressure
Analytic for Hemodynamic Instability (AHI) is a software as a medical device (SaMD) that analyzes Lead-II ECG signals to identify patients who are showing signs of hemodynamic instability. Signs of hemodynamic instability are defined as low blood pressure (BP) and high heart rate (HR). The device processes 5 minutes of continuously recorded Lead II ECG data to determine the presence of a combination of HR ≥ 100 bpm and SBP
Here's a breakdown of the acceptance criteria and the study proving the device meets them, based on the provided text:
1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance
Windows-Based Performance Measure | Acceptable Threshold | Observed Estimate | 95% one-sided confidence interval |
---|---|---|---|
Sensitivity | >85% | 95.6% | 2.5% LCB: 88.9% |
1-Specificity | 75% | 84.9% | n/a (calculated from 1-Specificity) |
2. Sample Size Used for the Test Set and Data Provenance
- Test Set Sample Size: 222 patients contributed data for the primary analysis. These patients generated a large, unspecified number of "windows" of 5-minute ECG data, with (b) (4) windows containing valid paired data for comparison. Each patient contributed at most data from 150 windows.
- Data Provenance: Retrospective, single-center, observational study. The data was collected from November 26, 2019, through January 29, 2020, at the University of Michigan Medical Center. The data was "privately collected" and "IRB approved."
3. Number of Experts Used to Establish Ground Truth and Qualifications
The document does not explicitly state the number of experts used to establish the ground truth for the test set or their qualifications. Instead, the ground truth was established by:
- Continuous ECG monitoring.
- Continuous arterial line blood pressure monitoring.
The definition of hemodynamic instability used for ground truth (SBP
Ask a specific question about this device
Page 1 of 1