Search Results

This device is indicated for hemodialysis prescribed by physicians for adult patients with acute and chronic renal failure, treated in hospitals and dialysis clinics by qualified operators. This device is not indicated for pediatric patients. It is not for home use.

This device is made up of disposable bloodlines intended to provide extracorporeal access to a patient's blood during hemodialysis. It is the responsibility of the physician or other licensed practitioner to ensure compatibility with the available configurations.

The BLOOD TUBING LINES FOR HEMODIALYSIS AL series (Sterilized by Ethylene Oxide) includes arterial and venous dialysis blood tubing. The devices are packaged together for convenient use during hemodialysis procedures. They are manufactured for application with the DBB-06 PRO Hemodialysis Delivery System. The components of the device include tubing, drip chambers, infusion tubing, pressure monitoring lines, ports, clamps and filters which are used to pump blood, retain and capture blood debris, infuse medications or fluids, sample blood as well as monitor pressure.

The devices are packaged sterile and labeled for single use only. These devices cannot be cleaned and reused. They are restricted for sale by or on the order of a physician.

The BLOOD TUBING LINES FOR HEMODIALYSIS C18 series is one part of a blood tubing lines for hemodialysis. The devices are packaged together for convenient use during hemodialysis procedures. They are manufactured for application with the DBB-06 PRO Hemodialysis Delivery System. The devices are packaged sterile and labeled for single use only.

These devices cannot be cleaned or reused. They are restricted for sale by or on the order of a physician.

This document is a 510(k) clearance letter for "BLOOD TUBING LINES FOR HEMODIALYSIS AL Series (Archloop)" and "BLOOD TUBING LINES FOR HEMODIALYSIS C18 Series". It focuses on proving substantial equivalence to a predicate device, rather than providing the detailed acceptance criteria and study results for a new, innovative AI/software device.

Therefore, this document does not contain the information requested regarding acceptance criteria and performance studies for an AI/software device. The questions in the prompt (e.g., sample size for test sets, number of experts for ground truth, MRMC studies, standalone performance) are relevant to the validation of AI/Software as a Medical Device (SaMD), which is not the subject of this 510(k) clearance.

This submission primarily addresses:

• Device Description: Physical components and intended use of blood tubing lines.
• Technological Characteristics: Comparison of materials, design, and sterilization method to a predicate device.
• Bench Testing: Mechanical and functional performance tests for the physical tubing, such as structural integrity, pump segment performance, and resistance to kinking.
• Biological Safety Testing: Biocompatibility tests for materials in contact with blood.
• Sterilization and Shelf Life: Validation of these aspects.

There is no mention of any AI or software components, nor any studies that would involve human readers, ground truth established by experts, or deep learning models, which are the focus of your prompt's questions.

Ask a specific question about this device

This device is indicated for hemodialysis prescribed by physicians for adult patients with acute and chronic renal failure, treated in hospitals and dialysis clinics by qualified operators. This device is not indicated for pediatric patients. It is not for home use.

This device is made up of disposable bloodlines intended to provide extracorporeal access to a patient's blood during hemodialysis. It is the responsibility of the physician or other licensed practitioner to ensure compatibility with the available configurations.

The BLOOD TUBING LINES FOR HEMODIALYSIS AL series (Sterilized by Steam) includes arterial and venous dialysis blood tubing.

The devices are packaged together for convenient use during hemodialysis procedures. They are manufactured for application with the DBB-06 PRO Hemodialysis Delivery System.

The components of the device include tubing, drip chambers, infusion tubing, pressure monitoring lines, ports, clamps and filters which are used to pump blood, retain and capture blood debris, infuse medications or fluids, sample blood as well as monitor pressure.

The devices are packaged sterile and labeled for single use only. These devices cannot be cleaned and reused. They are restricted for sale by or on the order of a physician.

The BLOOD TUBING LINES FOR HEMODIALYSIS C18 series is one part of a blood tubing lines for hemodialysis. The devices are packaged together for convenient use during hemodialysis procedures. They are manufactured for application with the DBB-06 PRO Hemodialysis Delivery System. The devices are packaged sterile and labeled for single use only.

These devices cannot be cleaned or reused. They are restricted for sale by or on the order of a physician.

Based on the provided FDA 510(k) Clearance Letter for "BLOOD TUBING LINES FOR HEMODIALYSIS AL Series (Archloop) and C18 Series," the device in question is blood tubing lines, not an AI/software device. Therefore, many of the typical acceptance criteria and study components associated with AI-powered medical devices (like those requiring test sets, expert ground truth, MRMC studies, standalone performance, and extensive training data) are not applicable to this product.

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

• Technological Characteristics: Same intended use, design, configuration, scientific technology, and principles of operation.
• Material Equivalence: Similar materials, with no new or additional materials posing unaddressed risks.
• Performance Testing: Bench testing, sterilization validation, shelf-life testing, and biological safety testing.
• Compatibility: Ensuring compatibility with the intended hemodialysis delivery system.

Given that this is a physical medical device (blood tubing lines) and not a software/AI device, the request for a table of acceptance criteria and study details as typically applied to AI devices cannot be fully fulfilled from the provided document. The document confirms that no clinical performance data and no animal performance data were submitted for this 510(k). This is typical for Class II devices demonstrating substantial equivalence where bench and preclinical testing are sufficient based on established predicate devices and known risks.

However, I can extract the types of performance testing and safety evaluations that were conducted to "prove the device meets acceptance criteria" for a physical medical device:

Acceptance Criteria and Study for BLOOD TUBING LINES FOR HEMODIALYSIS (K242479)

Context: This device is a physical medical device (blood tubing lines) used in hemodialysis, not an AI or software-based device. Therefore, the "acceptance criteria" and "study" described below relate to the physical and biological performance of the tubing lines themselves, demonstrating their safety and effectiveness through substantial equivalence to a legally marketed predicate device.

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

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

• Sample Size: The document does not specify exact sample sizes for each bench, biological, sterilization, or shelf-life test. This information is typically detailed in the full submission, not the summary.
• Data Provenance: The studies are described as "completed" by the submitter, NIKKISO CO., LTD. The typical provenance for such tests would be internal lab testing or accredited third-party labs where the devices are manufactured or tested. No country of origin for the data itself is specified beyond the applicant being from Japan. These are pre-market, prospective tests performed specifically for this 510(k) submission.

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

• Not Applicable. This is a physical device clearance based on engineering performance and biological safety tests, not an AI device requiring expert-labeled medical imaging or clinical data. Ground truth for these types of tests is established through standardized methodologies (e.g., ISO standards, ASTM standards, AAMI standards) and quantitative measurements rather than expert consensus on subjective findings.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set

• Not Applicable. As above, no "test set" in the context of expert adjudication for AI models exists for this device. Performance is determined by meeting pre-defined quantitative thresholds and qualitative observations in laboratory settings.

5. If a Multi-Reader Multi-Case (MRMC) Comparative Effectiveness Study was done, and its Effect Size

• No. An MRMC comparative effectiveness study is designed to evaluate the impact of an AI system on human reader performance for diagnostic tasks. This device is blood tubing lines, not an AI diagnostic tool.
• The 510(k) summary explicitly states: "No clinical performance data is submitted in this 510(k)." and "No animal performance data is submitted in this 510(k)."

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

• Not Applicable. This is not a software algorithm. The "standalone performance" of the blood tubing refers to its ability to perform its function (e.g., maintain structural integrity, prevent kinking, ensure blood flow pathways) independently, which is covered by the extensive bench testing listed.

7. The Type of Ground Truth Used

• For Physical Performance/Bench Testing: Ground truth is defined by objective engineering specifications, performance standards (e.g., ISO, AAMI, ASTM), and quantitative measurements (e.g., tensile strength values, flow rates, volume measurements, pressure limits). These are often derived from predicate device performance and established medical device standards.
• For Biological Safety Testing: Ground truth is established by the results of standardized biological assays conforming to ISO 10993 series and FDA guidance, where specific chemical or biological reactions (e.g., cytotoxicity, hemolysis, pyrogenicity) are measured against predefined safety limits.

8. The Sample Size for the Training Set

• Not Applicable. There is no "training set" in the context of machine learning for this physical medical device. The device itself is manufactured, not "trained."

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

• Not Applicable. As there is no training set for an AI/software model, no ground truth needed to be established for it. The design and manufacturing process for the blood tubing lines are validated through the various tests described above, ensuring they meet the specified performance and safety characteristics.

Ask a specific question about this device

Bicarby™ Dialysate solutions are indicated for use as a dialysis fluid for adult patients in acute care settings, requiring Kidney Replacement Therapies (KRT).

Ci-Ca Dialysate solutions are indicated for use as a dialysis fluid for adult patients in acute care settings, requiring Kidney Replacement Therapies (KRT).

The Bicarby and Ci-Ca solutions are single-use, sterile, ready-to-use dialysis solutions consisting of sodium chloride, potassium chloride, magnesium chloride, calcium chloride (select solutions), sodium bicarbonate, and glucose. The calcium-containing solutions are available in five (5) formulations, while the calcium-free solutions are available in three (3) formulations. The Bicarby and Ci-Ca solutions are single-use, steam sterilized dialysis solutions for use in Kidney Replacement Therapy (KRT). The solutions are each provided in a 2-compartment bag. One compartment contains 4.75 L of a slightly alkaline bicarbonate solution and the other compartment contains 0.25 L of an acidic electrolyte, glucose solution. The 2 solutions are mixed before use by opening the peel seam between the compartments, yielding 5 L of a ready-to-use sterile solution. The dialysate bags are made of a gas barrier foil, a material manufactured without PVC, latex, or plasticizer. The calcium-containing solutions are designed for modalities using heparin anticoagulation, while the calcium-free solutions are intended for modalities using regional citrate anticoagulation (RCA). The calcium-free solutions sustain the anticoagulatory effect of citrate in the filter. Therefore, a separate infusion of calcium is mandatory when using these solutions.

The provided FDA 510(k) clearance letter (K243786) is for Bicarby and Ci-Ca Dialysate solutions, which are dialysis fluids. This type of device is classified as a Class II medical device (Hemodialysis system and accessories, product code KPO).

The provided documentation describes the acceptance criteria and supporting studies for these dialysate solutions, not for a software algorithm or AI-powered medical device that would have performance metrics like sensitivity, specificity, or AUC. The studies conducted are primarily focused on the physical, chemical, and biological safety and performance of the solution and its container system, rather than an AI device's diagnostic or predictive capabilities.

Therefore, many of the requested categories (e.g., sample size for test set, data provenance, number of experts, adjudication method, MRMC study, standalone performance, ground truth types, training set sample size, ground truth for training set) are not applicable to this type of device and the information provided in the 510(k) summary.

Below is a summary of the available information relevant to acceptance criteria and supporting studies for the Bicarby and Ci-Ca Dialysate solutions:

Acceptance Criteria and Device Performance (Not Applicable in the traditional sense for an AI device)

For this type of device (dialysis solutions), "acceptance criteria" relate to meeting specifications for chemical composition, sterility, packaging integrity, and biocompatibility rather than diagnostic performance metrics. The document details the key performance specifications for the chemical components.

Table of Acceptance Criteria (Key Performance Specifications) and Reported Device Performance

Note: The document states these are the "Key Performance Specifications," meaning the solutions are manufactured to these specific ionic contributions. The "Reported Device Performance" is implied to meet these specifications as part of the manufacturing and quality control process, which are regulated under GMP but specific quantified "performance" results are not provided in this 510(k) summary.

Study Information (as applicable to a dialysis solution):

A. Sample size used for the test set and the data provenance (e.g. country of origin of the data, retrospective or prospective)
* Not Applicable in the context of an AI device's test set. The studies conducted are primarily engineering, chemical, and biological evaluations, not data-driven performance assessments.
* For Biocompatibility, "testing was conducted to evaluate the material changes in accordance with ISO 10993-1:2018 and FDA guidance document...". This implies lab-based testing.
* For Human Factors Validation Testing, it was stated that "The Bicarby and Ci-Ca solutions were found to be safe and effective for their intended users, uses, and use environments." The sample size for this human factors study is not provided in the summary.

B. 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. No "ground truth" establishment by medical experts for a test set of images/data is relevant here. The ground truth for chemical composition is defined by the formula and analytical testing. Biocompatibility experts would assess the results of the specific biological tests.

C. Adjudication method (e.g. 2+1, 3+1, none) for the test set
* Not Applicable. This concept is for clinical or diagnostic studies involving human readers, not for chemical solutions or their packaging.

D. If a multi reader multi case (MRMC) comparative effectiveness study was done, If so, what was the effect size of how much human readers improve with AI vs without AI assistance
* No. This is a dialysis solution, not an AI diagnostic system.

E. If a standalone (i.e. algorithm only without human-in-the-loop performance) was done
* Not Applicable. This is a medical device (dialysate solution), not an algorithm.

F. The type of ground truth used (expert consensus, pathology, outcomes data, etc)
* For chemical composition: Defined chemical formula and analytical testing standards.
* For physical properties (e.g., shipping, connector integrity): Engineering specifications and test standards.
* For biocompatibility: Reference to international standards (ISO 10993-1:2018) and established biological endpoints (Cytotoxicity, Sensitization, Irritation, Material Mediated Pyrogenicity, Hemocompatibility, Genotoxicity) with a toxicological risk assessment.

G. The sample size for the training set
* Not Applicable. This is a manufactured product, not a machine learning model.

H. How the ground truth for the training set was established
* Not Applicable. This is a manufactured product, not a machine learning model.

Summary of Performance Data Conducted:

The device's substantial equivalence to predicate devices was supported by the following performance data:

1. Shipping and Distribution Testing: Demonstrated "the integrity and robustness of the bag system packaging within the distribution environment."
2. HF-Connector Testing:
   • Evaluated torque for removing protective cap and male/female connector torque.
   • Evaluated breaking strength of the cone.
   • Evaluated leakage and tightness of connectors.
   • Evaluated pull-out force of connectors and injection ports.
3. Biocompatibility Testing: Conducted in accordance with ISO 10993-1:2018 and FDA guidance. Assessed endpoints including Chemical Characterization, Cytotoxicity, Sensitization, Irritation, Material Mediated Pyrogenicity, Hemocompatibility, and Genotoxicity. A toxicological risk assessment was also performed. These tests confirm the safety of the materials used in the container closure system.
4. Human Factors Validation Testing: Concluded the solutions were "safe and effective for their intended users, uses, and use environments."
5. Not Applicable for this device type: Electrical Safety and Electromagnetic Compatibility (EMC), Software Verification and Validation Testing, Animal Studies, Clinical Studies.

Conclusion:

The 510(k) summary concludes that the Bicarby and Ci-Ca solutions are substantially equivalent to the predicate devices and are safe and effective for their intended use, based on the non-clinical performance testing summarized above, primarily focusing on materials, packaging integrity, and chemical specifications.

Ask a specific question about this device

The Moda-flx Hemodialysis System™ Cartridge is a single use, disposable arterial and venous bloodline set, with dialysate tubing, intended to provide extracorporeal access during hemodialysis. The Moda-flx Hemodialysis System™ Cartridge is compatible only with the Moda-flx Hemodialysis System ™

The Moda-flx Hemodialysis System™ Cartridge is a single use blood tubing set that provides extracorporeal access during hemodialysis and is only compatible with Moda-flx Hemodialysis System™

The provided text is a 510(k) Summary for the Moda-flx Hemodialysis System™ Cartridge. It describes the device, its intended use, and comparability to a predicate device. However, it does not contain specific acceptance criteria, reported device performance metrics in a table, sample sizes, information about expert-established ground truth, adjudication methods, or MRMC study details. The document states that "No animal or clinical studies were required to support this submission," which implies that a standalone performance study as typically understood for AI/ML devices involving human-in-the-loop or standalone algorithm performance was not conducted.

Therefore, many of the requested details about acceptance criteria and study particulars cannot be extracted from this document.

Here's a summary of what is available based on the provided text:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance:

The document lists performance tests that were conducted but does not provide specific acceptance criteria or quantitative performance results in a table format. It only states that the tests supported the substantial equivalence determination.

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

Not explicitly stated. The tests performed are engineering/performance verification tests of the device's physical components and functionality, not clinical test sets with patient data.

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

Not applicable, as this is not a diagnostic device relying on expert-established ground truth from clinical data.

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

Not applicable, as this is not a diagnostic device relying on expert adjudication of clinical data.

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

No, an MRMC study was not done. The document explicitly states: "No animal or clinical studies were required to support this submission." This type of study is relevant for diagnostic devices, particularly those incorporating AI, which this device is not.

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

No, a standalone performance study for an algorithm was not done. This device is a physical hemodialysis cartridge, not an AI/ML algorithm.

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

Not applicable in the context of clinical ground truth. The "ground truth" for the performance tests would be established by engineering specifications and industry standards for medical device functionality and safety.

8. The sample size for the training set:

Not applicable. This device is not an AI/ML model that requires a training set.

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

Not applicable. This device is not an AI/ML model.

Ask a specific question about this device

SC+ Hemodialysis Device/ Dialysate Cartridge:

The SC+ Hemodialysis System is indicated for use in patients with acute and/or chronic renal failure, with or without ultrafiltration, in an acute or chronic care facility. Treatments must be administered under physician's prescription, by a trained clinician who is competent in the use of the device. The SC+ Hemodialysis System is also indicated for use in the home by trained patients in tandem with a trained care partner.

Blood Tube Set

The SC+ Blood Tube Set is a single use, disposable arterial and venous bloodline set intended to provide extracorporeal access during hemodialysis. The Blood Tubeset is compatible only with the SC+ Hemodialysis System.

The SC+ is a haemodialysis delivery system intended for the provision of acute and chronic dialysis therapy, with or without ultrafiltration. The SC+ system utilises incoming Dialysis Water from an external source, with industry standard dialysis concentrate consumables, to manufacture the dialysis fluid used to deliver the treatment. The SC+ system is for use in patients with arteriovenous (AV) fistulas or central venous catheter access.

The SC+ system consists of the SC+ Machine, a single use disposable Dialysate Cartridge, and a sterile, single use, disposable Blood Tubeset.

The SC+ Machine consists of a water circuit (heater, de-aeration module, etc) blood leak detector, air in blood detector, a pneumatic interface for the dialysate cartridges, a peristaltic blood pump and various other sensors. The dialysate cartridge contains the following: conductivity monitors, interfaces for pressure and temperature measurement. membrane pumps to perform mixing/proportioning in order to produce dialysis fluid and the controlled removal of fluid from a patient with acute and/or chronic renal failure based on a physician's prescription. The dialysate fluid is manufactured using dialysis water purified externally by reverse osmosis that is heated to approximately 37℃ and subsequently deaerated within the machine before entering the cartridge.

The SC+ Blood Tubeset is a single use, sterile device consisting of an arterial line, a venous line, connections to a standard dialyzer, a saline line, three pressure transducer pods integrated into a single unit, a venous drip chamber, and a line for heparin infusion.

The provided text is a 510(k) summary for the Quanta Dialysis Technologies SC+ Hemodialysis Device, Dialysate Cartridge, and Blood Tube Set. The core of this submission is to expand the indications for use of the SC+ Hemodialysis System to include home use.

This document does not include information about AI/ML device performance, interpretation by human readers, or specific quantitative acceptance criteria for features like accuracy, sensitivity, or specificity. Instead, it describes acceptance criteria related to safety and effectiveness for a medical device in a new use environment (home healthcare) and for new user groups (patients and caregivers).

Therefore, a table of acceptance criteria and reported device performance (in the context of AI metrics) cannot be extracted directly from this document. Similarly, details on sample sizes for test sets in an AI context, expert ground truth establishment, MRMC studies, or standalone algorithm performance are not applicable to the information provided.

However, I can extract the information related to the clinical study supporting the new indication for use, which serves as the "study that proves the device meets the acceptance criteria" in the context of this device.

Here's a breakdown of the relevant information from the document:

Study That Proves the Device Meets the Acceptance Criteria:

The study conducted to support the expansion of indications to home use was the HOME RUN clinical trial (G200362).

• Type of Ground Truth Used: Clinical outcomes data (mean standardized weekly Kt/V for effectiveness, and rate of AEs for safety).
• Sample Size Used for the Test Set (Clinical Study):
  • Evaluable Population: n = 32 subjects. This included all subjects who were enrolled in the study and successfully completed at least 75% of their dialysis treatments.
• Data Provenance:
  • Country of Origin: Multi-center study in the US (13 sites).
  • Retrospective or Prospective: Prospective.
• Number of Experts Used to Establish the Ground Truth for the Test Set and Qualifications of Those Experts: Not applicable in the context of "ground truth" for an AI model. However, an Independent Safety and Clinical Ethics Committee (SCEC) was created to oversee trial safety.
  • Qualifications of Experts: Comprised nephrologists with experience of hemodialysis, one of whom had significant experience in home hemodialysis.
• Adjudication Method for the Test Set: The SCEC was blinded to whether AEs occurred in the in-clinic or in-home phase and had the authority to recommend changes to the trial. Details on specific adjudication rules for AEs (e.g., 2+1, 3+1) are not provided, but the SCEC served an oversight and review role.
• 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/ML device in the context of diagnostic interpretation. The study compared device performance (safety and effectiveness) in two settings (in-clinic vs. in-home).
• If a Standalone (i.e. algorithm only without human-in-the-loop performance) was done: Not applicable. This is a medical device, and its performance is the "algorithm" in action (the hemodialysis process). The study evaluated its use by human users (patients/caregivers/clinicians).
• The Sample Size for the Training Set: Not applicable. This document describes a clinical trial for device efficacy and safety, not an AI model requiring a training set.
• How the Ground Truth for the Training Set was Established: Not applicable.

Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance (as related to the clinical study):

The acceptance criteria for the expanded indication were based on demonstrating comparable safety and effectiveness in the home setting as in the clinic, considering the new use environment and user groups.

In summary, this FDA clearance document primarily focuses on the clinical validation and human factors validation required to expand the intended use of a hemodialysis device to a home setting, rather than AI/ML performance metrics. The "acceptance criteria" here relate to demonstrating equivalent safety and effectiveness in the new use environment.

Ask a specific question about this device

The Moda-flx Hemodialysis System™ is indicated for use in patients with acute and/or chronic renal failure, with or without ultrafiltration, in an acute, post-acute, or chronic care facility. Treatments must be administered under a physician's prescription, by a trained person who is considered competent in the use of the device.

Treatment types available include: Intermittent Hemodialysis (IHD), Sustained Low Efficiency Dialysis (SLED/ SLEDD), and Prolonged Intermittent Renal Replacement Therapy (PIRRT).

The Moda-flx Hemodialysis System™ Cartridge is a single use, disposable arterial and venous bloodline set, with dialysate tubing, intended to provide extracorporeal access during hemodialysis. The Moda-flx Hemodialysis System™ Cartridge is compatible only with the Moda-flx Hemodialysis System TM.

The Moda-flx Hemodialysis System™ is a transportable hemodialysis system that consists of three parts: Hemodialysis Delivery (HD) Device. Dialysate Generator (DG) Device, and a single use Moda-flx Hemodialysis System™ Cartridge that provides extracorporeal access during hemodialysis. The Moda-flx Hemodialysis System™ Cartridge is only compatible with the Modaflx Hemodialysis System™. The system creates purified water from tap water; from this purified water and chemical concentrates, the system creates dialysate in real time. The chemicals used to create the dialysate are standard 45X concentrates.

Ultrafiltration is achieved by controlling the dialysate going in and coming out of the dialyzer independently, using pumps on the HD Device to control fluid flow from both the inlet and outlet of the dialyzer. An external bag of saline is used to provide solution infusions to combat hypotensive episodes. Saline is also used to prime the Moda-flx Hemodialysis System™ Cartridge prior to use.

Prescribed blood flow rate is generated by a peristaltic pump, while heparin is administered to prevent blood coagulation. All fluid pathways are disposable and easily installed and replaced. Once installed, the device will check the connections of the fluid pathways and the system will automatically prepare itself for treatment.

This document is a 510(k) summary for the Moda-flx Hemodialysis System and Cartridge. It outlines the device's indications for use, its description, and a comparison to predicate devices, but does not provide the acceptance criteria or results of a study designed to prove the device meets specific acceptance criteria related to its clinical performance.

The "Performance Data" section lists various tests conducted, such as biocompatibility, electrical safety, software verification, and bench performance (including clearance, transport, and dialyzer integrity testing). It explicitly states that "no clinical studies were required to support this submission." This indicates that the FDA's substantial equivalence determination for this device was based on non-clinical performance data and comparison to predicate devices, rather than a clinical study demonstrating specific efficacy or clinical performance acceptance criteria.

Therefore, I cannot provide the requested information about acceptance criteria and a study proving the device meets them, as such a study (specifically a clinical one with performance metrics) is stated as not being required and thus not provided in this document.

However, based on the information provided, here's what can be inferred about the types of performance criteria and tests performed, even if specific numerical acceptance values aren't given:

Inferred Information from the Document:

While specific clinical acceptance criteria are not detailed (as no clinical study was required for this submission), the document does list various performance data provided in support of substantial equivalence. These imply underlying performance criteria for safety and technical functionality.

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance: This information is not provided in the document for clinical performance. The document only lists categories of tests performed.

2. Sample size used for the test set and the data provenance: This information is not provided in the document for any of the listed performance tests. The provenance (e.g., country of origin, retrospective/prospective) is also not provided.

3. Number of experts used to establish the ground truth for the test set and the qualifications of those experts: This information is not applicable/provided, as no clinical study with "ground truth" established by experts is mentioned. For the non-clinical tests (e.g., bench testing, software V&V), the "ground truth" would be the engineering specifications and regulatory standards.

4. Adjudication method (e.g., 2+1, 3+1, none) for the test set: This information is not applicable/provided, as no clinical study requiring adjudication is 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: This information is not applicable/provided. The device is a hemodialysis system, not an AI-assisted diagnostic tool involving human readers.

6. If a standalone (i.e., algorithm only without human-in-the-loop performance) was done: This information is not applicable/provided. The device is a medical system, not an AI algorithm in the typical sense of "standalone performance" for diagnostic or predictive tasks. Performance was likely evaluated for the integrated system.

7. The type of ground truth used (expert consensus, pathology, outcomes data, etc.): For the non-clinical tests mentioned (biocompatibility, electrical safety, software V&V, bench performance, etc.), the "ground truth" would be established by relevant engineering standards, regulatory requirements, and internal specifications for the device's functional performance. No clinical ground truth (like pathology or outcomes data) was used or required for this submission according to the document.

8. The sample size for the training set: This information is not applicable/provided. As no clinical study requiring "training data" for an AI model is described, this question is not relevant to the provided text.

9. How the ground truth for the training set was established: This information is not applicable/provided for the same reasons as point 8.

Ask a specific question about this device

The HemoCare® Hemodialysis System is indicated for hemodialysis treatment, including short daily and nocturnal hemodialysis, of renal failure patients. The HemoCare Hemodialysis System is indicated for use in chronic dialysis facilities, self-care dialysis facilities, and the home setting. All treatments must be prescribed by a physician and administered by a trained operator. Treatments must be performed with the assistance or observation of an individual who has been trained and is considered competent in the use of the device. The HemoCare Hemodialysis System is not indicated for solo hemodialysis in the home setting.

The HemoCare® Hemodialysis System is a self-contained, software-controlled device that provides hemodialysis treatments, including short daily and nocturnal hemodialysis, for patients with renal failure. The device is intended for use by a single patient in chronic dialysis facilities, self-care dialysis facilities, and the home setting. The HemoCare® Hemodialysis System is composed of the following components:

• The HemoCare® Treatment Device is a hemodialysis delivery system. When provided a source of water for dialysis, it produces infusion grade dialysate using liquid acid and powder bicarbonate concentrates. The Treatment Device provides secure, 2-way communication with the cloud for transmitting patient registration, physician-prescribed dialysis treatments, patient monitoring, and device status information.
• The HemoCare® Water Device is a water purification system that produces water for dialysis through distillation of EPA drinking water. The Water Device interfaces with the Treatment Device.
• The Blood Treatment Set connects to the patient access site and interfaces with the Treatment Device to provide extracorporeal blood flow through a dialyzer for dialysis treatment. The Blood Treatment Set is terminally sterilized and includes displacement blood pumps, a heparin delivery system, and an access disconnect sensor. The Blood Treatment set can be used for up to 16 treatments.

The provided text describes the HemoCare® Hemodialysis System, a medical device. However, it does not contain the specific information required to complete the detailed table about acceptance criteria and device performance results as requested, nor does it detail a study proving the device meets acceptance criteria in the context of an AI/ML algorithm.

The document is a 510(k) summary for a hemodialysis system, focusing on its substantial equivalence to predicate devices. It outlines performance data categories like Biocompatibility, Electrical Safety, Software Verification and Validation, Bench Performance Testing, Sterilization and Shelf Life, Human Factors, and Clinical Testing.

Importantly, the document does not describe an AI/ML algorithm that would have "acceptance criteria," "test sets," "ground truth," "expert readers," or "MRMC studies" in the context typically associated with an AI/ML medical device submission. The "Software Verification and Validation Testing" section states that "Testing results demonstrate that the device meets all software performance requirements," but it does not specify what those requirements are, nor does it indicate these requirements relate to an AI/ML diagnostic or predictive function.

Therefore, I cannot fulfill the request as the type of information sought (related to AI/ML algorithm performance) is not present in the provided text. The document is about a physical medical device (hemodialysis system) and its regulatory clearance as substantially equivalent to existing devices, not about a software-as-medical-device (SaMD) or AI-enabled medical device performance study with the detailed metrics requested.

Ask a specific question about this device

The HemoCare Bicarbonate Concentrate Set (BCS) is indicated for use in the preparation of dialysate in a 3-stream proportioning hemodialysis machine with a compatible mechanical interface, such as the HemoCare Hemodialysis System. The BCS is intended for extracorporeal bicarbonate hemodialysis for chronic renal failure, according to a physician's prescription.

The HemoCare Bicarbonate Concentrate Set (BCS) is the Subject Device of this submission. It consists of powdered sodium bicarbonate in a single use cartridge with an integrated tubing assembly for interfacing with hemodialysis systems with compatible three-stream proportioning connector ports such as the HemoCare Hemodialysis System. The HemoCare System uses the bicarbonate concentrate in 3-stream, 45x proportioning to generate dialysate for bicarbonate hemodialysis therapy.

This document is a 510(k) summary for the HemoCare Bicarbonate Concentrate Set (BCS). It outlines the device, its intended use, comparison to a predicate device, and performance data. However, it does not describe a study involving an AI/Machine Learning (ML) device.

Therefore, I cannot provide information on acceptance criteria, reported device performance, sample sizes, expert qualifications, adjudication methods, MRMC studies, standalone performance, or ground truth details as they pertain to an AI/ML device.

The document focuses on the HemoCare Bicarbonate Concentrate Set, which is a medical accessory for hemodialysis, and its performance data relates to biocompatibility and bench testing to verify specified performance, not the performance of an AI/ML algorithm.

Ask a specific question about this device

The NovaLine SP-C35 Transducer Protector is a single-use, disposable, prescription device intended for use as a protective device for pressure monitors and to help prevent contamination of the fluid pathway in hemodialysis delivery systems.

The NovaLine SP-C35 Transducer Protector consists of a plastic housing that contains a hydrophobic filter with a reference pore size of 0.2 µ m. The housing has male and female luer lock connectors that allow its attachment between a blood tubing set and the pressure monitor on a hemodialysis machine.

The NovaLine SP-C35 Transducer Protector is to be used as protective device for pressure monitors as well as to help maintain the sterility of the blood tubing fluid pathway. The 0.2 ↓ m hydrophobic filter helps prevent cross-contamination by viruses, bacterial and particulate matter while preventing the flow of fluids to the hemodialysis machine pressure monitor.

The devices are packaged sterile and labeled for single use only.

The proposed devices are provided in sterile condition, it is subject to e-beam radiation sterilization prior to release to achieve a Sterility Assurance Level (SAL) of 10-6.

Here's a breakdown of the acceptance criteria and study information for the NovaLine SP-C35 Transducer Protector based on the provided FDA 510(k) summary.

Note: This document describes a medical device, not an AI or software-based medical device. Therefore, many of the requested fields related to AI performance, ground truth, and expert evaluation are not applicable.

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

Device: NovaLine SP-C35 Transducer Protector

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

The document does not specify exact sample sizes for each test within the finished product performance, packaging, or shelf-life evaluations. It mentions "proposed devices" were tested, implying a statistical sample was used according to the relevant standards, but the specific number is not provided.

Data Provenance: The tests were conducted by Bain Medical Equipment (Guangzhou) Co., Ltd. in China. The data is retrospective in the sense that the testing was performed on manufactured devices to support the 510(k) submission.

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

Not Applicable. This is a medical device (transducer protector) and not an AI/software device. The "ground truth" here refers to the physical and biological properties of the device, established through standardized laboratory testing, not human expert interpretation of data.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set

Not Applicable. As this is not an AI/software device involving human interpretation, there is no adjudication method in the traditional sense. Device performance is determined by objective, measurable laboratory tests against pre-defined specifications and standards.

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

No. An MRMC study is relevant for imaging or diagnostic AI, comparing human readers with and without AI assistance. This device is a component of a hemodialysis system, and its performance is assessed through physical, chemical, and biological testing.

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

Not Applicable. This device is hardware, not an algorithm or software.

7. The Type of Ground Truth Used

The "ground truth" for this device's performance is established by:

• Standardized Test Results: Objective measurements from various laboratory tests (e.g., dimensional measurements, sterile barrier integrity, biocompatibility assays).
• Compliance with Recognized Standards: Adherence to international and national standards such as ISO 80369-7, ISO 10993 series, ASTM F88, ASTM F1929, ASTM D4169, USP , ASTM F1671, etc.
• Predicate Device Equivalence: Direct comparison to the performance characteristics of a legally marketed predicate device (Nipro Transducer Protector TP-SURE, K072988) where applicable.

8. The Sample Size for the Training Set

Not Applicable. This is a physical medical device, not an AI/machine learning model, so there is no training set.

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

Not Applicable. See response to #8.

Ask a specific question about this device

pureFLOW solutions are indicated for use as a dialysate in Continuous Renal Replacement Therapy.

pureFLOW solutions are single-use, sterile, ready-to-use dialysis solutions consisting of sodium chloride, potassium chloride, magnesium chloride, sodium bicarbonate, and glucose. The pureFLOW dialysis are available in four (4) formulations which differ in potassium chloride concentration.

The provided text does not contain information about acceptance criteria and a study proving the device meets those criteria in the context of an AI/human reader study or standalone AI performance.

The document is a 510(k) summary for a medical device called "pureFLOW" solutions, which are dialysate solutions used in Continuous Renal Replacement Therapy (CRRT). The entire summary focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence of the new pureFLOW solutions (manufactured in Mexico) to a predicate pureFLOW device (manufactured in Germany).

The performance data section (1.8 Performance Data) does detail various tests conducted to support substantial equivalence. However, these are engineering and chemical tests related to the physical properties and stability of the product and its packaging, not diagnostic performance of an AI or human readers.

Specifically, the "Performance Data" section discusses:

• 5 L Bag Hanging: Stability of eyelets.
• Shipping and Distribution: Integrity and robustness of packaging.
• Injection Port: Integrity and penetration force of septum and injection port.
• Temperature and Pressure Resistance: Performance of the bag under varying temperature and pressure.
• Gas Barrier: Integrity of the bag as a CO2 barrier.
• Biocompatibility Testing: Chemical characterization, cytotoxicity, sensitization, irritation, material mediated pyrogenicity, hemocompatibility, genotoxicity.
• Human Factors Validation Testing: Found safe and effective for intended users, uses, and environments (no specific details on methodology or metrics provided in this summary).
• Electrical Safety and Electromagnetic Compatibility (EMC): Not applicable.
• Software Verification and Validation Testing: Not applicable.
• Animal Studies: None performed.
• Clinical Studies: None performed.

Therefore, I cannot fulfill the request to describe acceptance criteria and a study proving a device meets them in the context of AI performance, human reader performance, MRMC studies, or related ground truth establishment, as this information is not present in the provided document. The device in question is a medical solution, not a software device that would involve such studies.

Ask a specific question about this device