Who is the manufacturer of Konan Specular Microscope XVII?

Konan Medical, Inc. filed the 510(k) submission for Konan Specular Microscope XVII (K191558).

What is the FDA product code for Konan Specular Microscope XVII?

NQE. It is classified under 21 CFR 886.1850 as a Class 2 device in the Ophthalmic panel.

What is the regulatory pathway for Konan Specular Microscope XVII?

510(k) clearance (submission type: Traditional).

What are the predicate devices for Konan Specular Microscope XVII?

Konan Specular Microscope XIV, CellChek Plus (K120264).

Who can help prepare an FDA 510(k) submission like Konan Specular Microscope XVII?

Innolitics — a medical-device software consultancy — provides regulatory and engineering support for FDA 510(k) submissions. See https://innolitics.com/services/510ks/ or contact https://innolitics.com/contact.

Konan Specular Microscope XVII

K191558 · Konan Medical, Inc. · NQE · Mar 26, 2020 · Ophthalmic

Device Facts

Record ID	K191558
Device Name	Konan Specular Microscope XVII
Applicant	Konan Medical, Inc.
Product Code	NQE · Ophthalmic
Decision Date	Mar 26, 2020
Decision	SESE
Submission Type	Traditional
Regulation	21 CFR 886.1850
Device Class	Class 2

Intended Use

The Konan Specular Microscope XVII, CellChek 20, is a non-contact ophthalmic microscope, optical pachymeter, and camera intended for examination of the corneal endothelium and for measurement of the thickness of the cornea.

Device Story

The Konan Specular Microscope XVII (CellChek 20) is a non-contact ophthalmic device that captures images of the corneal endothelium and measures corneal thickness. It uses infrared-based auto-focusing and alignment to capture reflected light from the patient's eye. The device features a 3-axis mechanical alignment system (X, Y, Z). It provides computer-assisted cell counting and analysis, calculating corneal endothelial cell density (CD), coefficient of variation (CV), and hexagonality (HEX). The device is operated by ophthalmic staff in a clinical setting. The user interacts with a touch screen to perform manual analysis (placing dots or tracing boundaries) or utilizes automated algorithms. Output is displayed on the monitor and can be printed. The device aids clinicians in assessing corneal health by providing quantitative endothelial metrics, which support clinical decision-making regarding corneal function.

Clinical Evidence

A prospective clinical study of 80 subjects (65.6 years mean age) compared the subject device against the reference device (NONCON ROBO PACHY F&A). Primary endpoints were agreement, accuracy, and precision of CD, CV, and HEX. Results showed strong positive correlations between the subject device and reference device across center and peripheral corneal areas. Precision (repeatability/reproducibility) of the subject device was found to be superior or equivalent to the reference device. No adverse events were reported.

Technological Characteristics

Non-contact ophthalmic microscope/pachymeter. Materials: ABS resin (forehead/chin rests). Alignment: 3-axis (X, Y, Z). Energy: 100-240VAC, 50/60Hz. Connectivity: Touch screen display, printer output. Software: CellChek analysis program for endothelial cell metrics. Biocompatibility: Proven via ABS resin usage.

Indications for Use

Indicated for examination of the corneal endothelium and measurement of corneal thickness in patients requiring ophthalmic assessment.

Regulatory Classification

Identification

An AC-powered slitlamp biomicroscope is an AC-powered device that is a microscope intended for use in eye examination that projects into a patient's eye through a control diaphragm a thin, intense beam of light.

Special Controls

*Classification.* Class II (special controls). The device, when it is intended only for the visual examination of the anterior segment of the eye, is classified as Group 1 per FDA-recognized consensus standard ANSI Z80.36, does not provide any quantitative output, and is not intended for screening or automated diagnostic indications, is exempt from the premarket notification procedures in subpart E of part 807 of this chapter subject to the limitations in § 886.9.

Predicate Devices

Konan Specular Microscope XIV, CellChek Plus (K120264)

Reference Devices

NONCON ROBO PACHY F&A (K062763)

Related Devices

K142417 — SP-1PSpecular Microscope · Topcon Corporation · May 29, 2015
K120264 — KONAN SPECULAR MICROSCOPE XIV · Konan Medical, Inc. · Apr 11, 2012
K171313 — EM-4000 Specular Microscope · Tomey Corporation · Jan 19, 2018
K151706 — Specular Microscope CEM- 530 · Nidek Co., Ltd. · Mar 17, 2016
K062763 — NONCON ROBO PACHY F&A · Konan Medical, Inc. · Feb 22, 2008

Submission Summary (Full Text)

{0}------------------------------------------------ Image /page/0/Picture/0 description: The image contains the logo of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). On the left is the Department of Health & Human Services logo. To the right of that is the FDA logo, which is a blue square with the letters "FDA" in white. To the right of the blue square is the text "U.S. FOOD & DRUG ADMINISTRATION" in blue. March 26, 2020 Konan Medical, Inc. % Alan Donald President Matrix Medical Consulting Inc 8880 Rio San Diego Drive Suite 800 San Diego, California 92108 Re: K191558 Trade/Device Name: Konan Specular Microscope XVII Regulation Number: 21 CFR 886.1850 Regulation Name: AC-Powered Slitlamp Biomicroscope Regulatory Class: Class II Product Code: NQE Dated: February 12, 2020 Received: February 18, 2020 Dear Alan Donald: We have reviewed your Section 510(k) premarket notification of intent to market the device referenced above and have determined the device is substantially equivalent (for the indications for use stated in the enclosure) to legally marketed predicate devices marketed in interstate commerce prior to May 28, 1976, the enactment date of the Medical Device Amendments, or to devices that have been reclassified in accordance with the provisions of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (Act) that do not require approval of a premarket approval application (PMA). You may, therefore, market the device, subject to the general controls provisions of the Act. Although this letter refers to your product as a device, please be aware that some cleared products may instead be combination products. The 510(k) Premarket Notification Database located at https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfpmn/pmn.cfm identifies combination product submissions. The general controls provisions of the Act include requirements for annual registration, listing of devices, good manufacturing practice, labeling, and prohibitions against misbranding and adulteration. Please note: CDRH does not evaluate information related to contract liability warranties. We remind you, however, that device labeling must be truthful and not misleading. If your device is classified (see above) into either class II (Special Controls) or class III (PMA), it may be subject to additional controls. Existing major regulations affecting your device can be found in the Code of Federal Regulations, Title 21, Parts 800 to 898. In addition, FDA may publish further announcements concerning your device in the Federal Register. Please be advised that FDA's issuance of a substantial equivalence determination does not mean that FDA has made a determination that your device complies with other requirements of the Act or any Federal statutes and regulations administered by other Federal agencies. You must comply with all the Act's {1}------------------------------------------------ requirements, including, but not limited to: registration and listing (21 CFR Part 807); labeling (21 CFR Part 801); medical device reporting of medical device-related adverse events) (21 CFR 803) for devices or postmarketing safety reporting (21 CFR 4, Subpart B) for combination products (see https://www.fda.gov/combination-products/guidance-regulatory-information/postmarketing-safety-reportingcombination-products); good manufacturing practice requirements as set forth in the quality systems (OS) regulation (21 CFR Part 820) for devices or current good manufacturing practices (21 CFR 4, Subpart A) for combination products; and, if applicable, the electronic product radiation control provisions (Sections 531-542 of the Act); 21 CFR 1000-1050. Also, please note the regulation entitled, "Misbranding by reference to premarket notification" (21 CFR Part 807.97). For questions regarding the reporting of adverse events under the MDR regulation (21 CFR Part 803), please go to https://www.fda.gov/medical-device-safety/medical-device-reportingmdr-how-report-medical-device-problems. For comprehensive regulatory information about mediation-emitting products, including information about labeling regulations, please see Device Advice (https://www.fda.gov/medicaldevices/device-advice-comprehensive-regulatory-assistance) and CDRH Learn (https://www.fda.gov/training-and-continuing-education/cdrh-learn). Additionally, you may contact the Division of Industry and Consumer Education (DICE) to ask a question about a specific regulatory topic. See the DICE website (https://www.fda.gov/medical-device-advice-comprehensive-regulatoryassistance/contact-us-division-industry-and-consumer-education-dice) for more information or contact DICE by email (DICE@fda.hhs.gov) or phone (1-800-638-2041 or 301-796-7100). Sincerely, Elvin Ng Acting Assistant Director DHT1A: Division of Ophthalmic Devices OHT1: Office of Ophthalmic, Anesthesia, Respiratory, ENT and Dental Devices Office of Product Evaluation and Quality Center for Devices and Radiological Health Enclosure {2}------------------------------------------------ | DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES | | |--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | Food and Drug Administration | | | | Form Approved: OMB No. 0910-0120 | | | Expiration Date: 06/30/2020 | | Indications for Use | | | | See PRA Statement below. | | 510(k) Number (if known) | K191558 | | Device Name | Konan Specular Microscope XVII | | Indications for Use (Describe) | The Konan Specular Microscope XVII, CellChek 20, is a non-contact ophthalmic microscope, optical pachymeter, and camera intended for examination of the corneal endothelium and for measurement of the thickness of the cornea. | | Type of Use (Select one or both, as applicable) | | | <label><input checked="checked" type="checkbox"/> Prescription Use (Part 21 CFR 801 Subpart D)</label> | <label><input type="checkbox"/> Over-The-Counter Use (21 CFR 801 Subpart C)</label> | CONTINUE ON A SEPARATE PAGE IF NEEDED. This section applies only to requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. *DO NOT SEND YOUR COMPLETED FORM TO THE PRA STAFF EMAIL ADDRESS BELOW.* The burden time for this collection of information is estimated to average 79 hours per response, including the time to review instructions, search existing data sources, gather and maintain the data needed and complete and review the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this information collection, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to: Department of Health and Human Services Food and Drug Administration Office of Chief Information Officer Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) Staff PRAStaff@fda.hhs.gov "An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB number." | FORM FDA 3881 (7/17) | Page 1 of 1 | PSC Publishing Services (301) 443-6740 EF | |----------------------|-------------|-------------------------------------------| |----------------------|-------------|-------------------------------------------| {3}------------------------------------------------ # 510(k) Summary {4}------------------------------------------------ The following 510(k) Summary is being submitted in accordance with the requirements of SMDA 1990 and CFR 807.92. # 510(k) Summary # Submitter Information | A. Company Name: | Konan Medical, Inc. | |---------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------| | B. Company Address: | 10-29, Miyanishicho, Nishinomiya Hyogo 662-0976, Japan | | C. Company Phone: | +81-798-36-3456 | | D. Company facsimile: | +81-798-26-1028 | | E. Contact Person: | Tatsuya Kasahara | | F. Date Summary Prepared: | March 23, 2020 | # Device Identification | A. Device Trade Name: | Konan Specular Microscope XVII, CellChek 20 | |----------------------------------|---------------------------------------------| | B. Common Name: | Specular Microscope | | C. Classification Name(s): | AC-powered Slit Lamp Biomicroscope | | D. Classification Regulation(s): | 886.1850 | | E. Device Class: | Class 2 | | F. Product Codes: | NQE | | G. Advisory Panel: | Ophthalmic | # Identification of Predicate Device The predicate device is the Konan Specular Microscope XIV, CellChek Plus, which was cleared by FDA under 510(k) number K120264 on April 11, 2012. In addition, the company has utilized the NONCON ROBO PACHY F&A, K062763, as a reference device. {5}------------------------------------------------ # Device Description The Konan Specular Microscope XVII, CellChek 20, is a non-contact ophthalmic microscope, optical pachymeter, and camera intended for examination of corneal endothelium and for measurement of the thickness of the cornea. Cell counting and analysis program are included, and allow for analysis of the images of the cell distribution of the eye. When photographing the corneal endothelium, the device performs the alignment and automatically focuses by capturing the reflected light from patient's eye with the camera. The device permits visual inspection and photography of the corneal endothelium and measurement of the corneal thickness without any object contacting the eye. It features focusing by means of infrared techniques, as well as computer-assisted cell counting and cell analysis capabilities. The computer functions are also used to aid in setting up the various features of the machine and to aid in photography. Photographic images are temporarily stored in the system's memory and can be preserved by using a printer. Both the image of the corneal endothelium and the various computerized control functions are displayed on the touch screen monitor. The parts of the device that come into contact with a patient are the forehead rest and the chin rest. Their material is acrylonitrile butadiene styrene (ABS), the same material used in reference device and one with proven biocompatibility. The function of the software installed in the device is to calculate mainly the cell density, the coefficient of variation of cell area and the percent hexagonality. In the manual methods, Actual identification if the cells and cell boundaries is done by the (physician) user. In the automatic method, the software detects the cells and cell boundaries, however, the user is given the opportunity to make corrections. In use, the user interacts with the software by visually placing dots in the center of cells as or by tracing cell boundaries as they appear or on a screen or uses the automatic algorithm. ### Indication for Use The Konan Specular Microscope XVII, CellChek 20, is a non-contact ophthalmic microscope, optical pachymeter, and camera intended for examination of the corneal endothelium and for measurement of the thickness of the cornea. {6}------------------------------------------------ # Technological Characteristics The Konan Specular Microscope XVII, CellChek 20, is technically equivalent to the Konan specular Microscope XIV, CellChek Plus. One of the principal design modifications for the device is that the mechanical unit used for alignment has changed. The mechanical unit of CellChek 20 has only three axes which work for X (right - left) - Y (up - down) - Z (forward - backward) alignment between the optics and a patient's eye. Therefore the patient needs to fixate on a peripheral target to obtain an image of endothelial cells at the peripheral position over the cornea. Another of the principal design modifications for the device is that the data analysis method has changed. The data analysis of CellChek 20 method consists of the Trace method with/without Auto-trace (which does not need to input parameter S, M, L or XL for analysis), the Center method with/without Auto-input (which uses the same algorithm as Auto-trace) and the Flex Center method with/without Auto-input (which uses the same algorithm as Auto-trace). A smaller CPU board (mother board) was implemented, and a new computer program was installed for the mechanical system and the data analysis system of CellChek 20. | Comparative table between CellChek Plus and CellChek 20 | | | | |---------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | Model name | CellChek Plus | CellChek 20 | Comparison | | 510(k) No. | K120264 | To Be Assigned by FDA | | | Device name registered | Konan Specular Microscope XIV | Konan Specular Microscope XVII | | | Intended use | The device is a non-contact ophthalmic microscope, optical pachymeter, and camera intended for examination of the corneal endothelium and for measurement of the thickness of the | The device is a non-contact ophthalmic microscope, optical pachymeter, and camera intended for examination of the corneal endothelium and for measurement of the thickness of | Same | | | cornea. | the cornea. | | | Composition | The device is composed of the optical unit, the mechanical unit, the electrical unit and the display. | The device is composed of the optical unit, the mechanical unit and the power unit which includes the electrical unit and the display. | Different on expression. No safety/effectiveness concern. | | Appearance | Image: Slit lamp | Image: Slit lamp | Different. No safety/effectiveness concern. | | Size | 683(H) x 365(W) x 451(D) mm | 451(H) x 310(W) x 459(D) mm | Different. No safety/effectiveness concern. | | Electric rating | Voltage: 100-230VAC Frequency: 50/60Hz, Power: 150VA | Voltage: 100-240VAC Frequency: 50/60Hz Power: 100VA | Almost same No safety/effectiveness concern. | | Class (Electrical Safety) | Class I Type B applied part | Class I Type B applied part | Same | | Operating Principle | The photographing the corneal endothelium, the device performs the alignment and automatically focuses by capturing the reflected light from the patient's eye with the camera. | The photographing the corneal endothelium, the device performs the alignment and automatically focuses by capturing the reflected light from the patient's eye with the camera. | Different on axes. No safety/effectiveness concern. | | | | | | | | The alignment is performed by 5 axes which are X (back and forth), Y (right and left), Z (up and down) θX (horizontal turn) and θY (vertical turn). | The alignment is performed by 3 axes which are X (back and forth), Y (right and left) and Z (up and down). | | | Photographed Area | 0.24 x 0.46 mm² | 0.25 x 0.55 mm² | Almost same. No safety/effectiveness concern. | | Analysis method | CellChek software: Corner method Auto trace method Center method ---------- Flex Center method ---------- | CellChek software: Trace method Auto Trace method Center method Auto Center method F Center method Auto F Center method | Different (Algorithm of Trace method, Center method and F center method has not changed). No safety/effectiveness concern. • Nomenclature was changed "Corner method" to "Trace method" and "Flex Center method" to "F Center method". • The Auto trace method does not need to input parameter S, M, L or XL for analysis. • "Auto Center method" and "Auto F Center method" were added. They use the same | | Materials of Patient Contacting Parts | PTFE (forehead rest) and ABS resin (chin rest) | ABS resin (forehead rest and chin rest) | algorithm of “Auto Trace method” and the center point of the endothelial cell is calculated as the gravity point of the endothelial cell by “Auto Trace method”. Different. No safety/effectiveness concern. Material of forehead rest was changed to the same material of chin rest. | {7}------------------------------------------------ {8}------------------------------------------------ {9}------------------------------------------------ # Summary of Testing - A. Non Clinical Testings The following testing was performed on the Konan Specular Microscope XVII, CellChek 20: - The CellChek 20 device was subjected to electrical safety testing in accordance with ANSI/AAMI ES 60601-1. - The CellChek 20 device was subjected to electromagnetic compatibility (EMC) testing in accordance with IEC 60601-1-2. - The CellChek 20 device was subjected to performance testing in accordance with ISO 15004-1. - The CellChek 20 device was subjected to optical radiation safety testing in accordance with ANSI Z80.36. - The CellChek 20 device was subjected to software validation testing in accordance with IEC 62304. ### Performance Testing - Clinical {10}------------------------------------------------ A prospective clinical study was conducted to assess the agreement, accuracy, and precision of the Konan Specular Microscope XVII, CellChek 20 by comparing the analytical results obtained with the NONCON ROBO PACHY F&A, a reference device, and also the predicate device for the Konan Specular Microscope XIV, CellChek Plus. This clinical performance testing includes the assessment of the agreement, accuracy, and precision of each of the 6 analysis methods, Trace Method, Auto Trace Method, Center Method, Auto Center Method, Flex Center Method, and Auto Flex Center Method of Konan Specular Microscope XVII, CellChek 20 by comparing with Center Method of NONCON ROBO PACHY F&A. The examinees are all of the patients who came to the ophthalmic clinic, which has agreed to cooperate with this study, after the study start date. Some of the ophthalmic staffs basically photographed the right eyes of the examinees with Konan Specular Microscope XVII, CellChek 20 and NONCON ROBO PACHY F&A. However, when their right eyes could not be clearly photographed, the left eyes were photographed. Three analysts analyzed the examinees' images with each of the 6 methods, Center Method, Auto Center Method, Trace Method, Auto Trace Method, Flex Center Method, Auto Flex Center Method, of CellChek 20, and Center Method of F&A. This study protocol pre-described criteria for the agreement limits is that the analysis result of each of the methods of CellChek 20 has a positive correlation with that of Center Method of F&A. The mean (SD) age of the 80 subjects, whose breakdown was 55 females and 25 males, of this study was 65.6 (10.8) years. No adverse events occurred in any examinees during this study. Additionally, no other safety issues of any kinds arose from the subject device and the reference device. The instruments of both of the devices were found to be safe and reliable in the assessment of corneal function. The primary efficiency endpoints are the agreement and precision of the 3 variables, that is, Corneal Endothelial Cell Density, Coefficient of Variation, and Hexagonality (hereinafter mentioned as CD, CV, and HEX, respectively). The discussion on the results of this performance testing is shown as follows. {11}------------------------------------------------ l. Agreement/Accuracy Analysis (Comparison between subject device and reference device) - 1) Cornea Measuring Area: Center Area Analysis Method: Center Method of Subject Device and Reference Device Table 1 Three Corneal Specular Microscopic Variables Assessed with Center Method of Subject Device and Reference Device – Center area | N=80 | CD (/mm²) | CV (%) | HEX (%) | |--------------------------------------------------------------|----------------------|-----------------|-------------------| | NONCON ROBO PACHY F&A (Reference Device) | | | | | Average (SD) | 2717.1 (486.74) | 33.8 (5.12) | 58.1 (7.42) | | Median | 2738.5 | 33.0 | 58.3 | | Min - Max | 849 - 3937 | 25 - 56 | 37 - 77 | | Konan Specular Microscope XVII, CellChek 20 (Subject Device) | | | | | Average (SD) | 2932.7 (527.83) | 34.0 (5.73) | 59.9 (7.05) | | Median | 2915.9 | 33.2 | 59.9 | | Min - Max | 816 - 4532 | 25 - 52 | 40 - 74 | | Device Comparisons | | | | | Average Difference (SD) | 215.6 (151.15) | 0.3 (3.85) | 1.8 (7.27) | | Average Difference (SD) as a % of F&A reading | 7.94% (5.563%) | 0.74% (11.403%) | 3.08% (12.523%) | | 95% LOA | (-86.7, 517.9) | (-7.5, 8.0) | (-12.8, 16.3) | | Correlation (R²) | 0.9193 | 0.5677 | 0.2460 | | Deming Regression Intercept (95% CI) | 107.6 (105.8, 109.4) | 5.5 (3.6, 7.5) | 32.5 (30.6, 34.5) | | Deming Regression Slope (95% CI) | 1.0 (1.0, 1.0) | 0.8 (0.8, 0.9) | 0.5 (0.4, 0.5) | Abbreviations: CD = corneal endothelial cell density; CI = confidence interval; CV = coefficient of variation; HEX = hexagonality; LOA = limits of agreement; SD = standard deviation The average differences were calculated as (Konan Specular Microscope XVII, CellChek 20) - (NONCON ROBO PACHY F&A). The average differences as a % of NONCON ROBO PACHY F&A reading were calculated by dividing the average differences with the averages of the reference device. The 95% LOA's were calculated as the average differences +/- 2SD's. {12}------------------------------------------------ a) CD Corneal endothelial cell density as measured with the subject device had the average (SD) of 2932.7 (527.83) compared with those of 2717.1 (486.74) for the reference device. The average difference (SD) were 215.6 (151.15). The Deming regression lines had the associated R2 value of 0.9193. b) Coefficient of Variation as measured with the subject device had the average (SD) of 34.0 (5.73) compared with those of 33.8 (5.12) for the reference device. The average difference (SD) were 0.3 (3.85). The Deming regression lines had the associated R2 value of 0.5677. ### c) Percent of Hexagonality as measured with the subject device had the average (SD) of 59.9 (7.05) compared with those of 58.1 (7.42) for the reference device. The average difference (SD) were 1.8 (7.27). The Deming regression lines had the associated R2 value of 0.2460. #### 2) Cornea Measuring Area: Peripheral Area Analysis Method: Center Method of Subject Device and Reference Device | | | Table 2 Three Corneal Specular Microscopic Variables Assessed with Center Method of Subject | | | | | |--|--|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--|--|--|--| | | | Device and Reference Device – Peripheral Area | | | | | | N=80 | CD (/mm²) | CV (%) | HEX (%) | |--------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------|-----------------|-----------------| | NONCON ROBO PACHY F&A (Reference Device) | | | | | Average (SD) | 2782.4 (464.10) | 33.5 (5.25) | 58.8 (6.98) | | Median | 2825.0 | 32.9 | 59.0 | | Min – Max | 884 - 3802 | 23 - 55 | 34 - 76 | | Konan Specular Microscope XVII, CellChek 20 (Subject Device) | | | | | Average (SD) | 2969.5 (507.65) | 34.4 (6.36) | 59.8 (6.00) | | Median | 3007.5 | 33.7 | 59.9 | | Min – Max | 904 - 4021 | 25 - 61 | 42 - 71 | | Device Comparisons | | | | | Average Difference (SD) | 187.1 (144.61) | 0.8 (4.57) | 1.0 (7.28) | | Average Difference (SD) as a % of F&A reading | 6.72% (5.197%) | 2.46% (13.642%) | 1.67% (12.375%) | {13}------------------------------------------------ 510(k) Summary – Konan Specular Microscope XVII, CellChek 20 | 95% LOA | (-102.1, 476.3) | (-8.3, 10.0) | (-13.6, 15.5) | |-----------------------------------------|-------------------|----------------|-------------------| | Correlation (R2) | 0.9209 | 0.4974 | 0.1439 | | Deming Regression Intercept (95% CI) | 48.8 (46.9, 50.8) | 5.7 (3.8, 7.6) | 40.6 (38.6, 42.6) | | Deming Regression Slope (95% CI) | 1.0 (1.0, 1.1) | 0.9 (0.8, 0.9) | 0.3 (0.3, 0.4) | Abbreviations: CD = corneal endothelial cell density; CI = confidence interval; CV = coefficient of variation; HEX = hexagonality; LOA = limits of agreement; SD = standard deviation The average differences were calculated as (Konan Specular Microscope XVII, CellChek 20) - (NONCON ROBO PACHY F&A). The average differences as a % of NONCON ROBO PACHY F&A reading were calculated by dividing the average differences with the averages of the reference device. The 95% LOA's were calculated as the average differences +/- 2SD's. #### a) CD Corneal endothelial cell density as measured with the subject device had the average (SD) of 2969.5 (507.65) compared with those of 2782.4 (464.10) for the reference device. The average difference (SD) were 187.1 (144.61). The Deming regression lines had the associated R2 value of 0.9209. # b) Coefficient of Variation as measured with the subject device had the average (SD) of 34.4 (6.36) compared with those of 33.5 (5.25) for the reference device. The average difference (SD) were 0.8 (4.57). The Deming regression lines had the associated R2 value of 0.4974. # c) HEX Percent of Hexagonality as measured with the subject device had the average (SD) of 59.8 (6.00) compared with those of 58.8 (6.98) for the reference device. The average difference (SD) were 1.0 (7.28). The Deming regression lines had the associated R2 value of 0.1439. {14}------------------------------------------------ - II. Agreement/Accuracy Analysis (Comparison between Center Method vs Trace Method, Auto Trance Method, Auto Center Method, Flex Center Method, and Auto Flex Center Method of Subject Device (Konan Specular Microscope XVII, CellChek 20)) - a) Corneal Measuring Area: Center Area Analysis Method: Center Method vs Trace Method of Subject Device Table 3 Three Corneal Specular Microscopic Variables Assessed with Two Analysis Methods -Center Method vs Trace Method – Center Area | N=80 | CD (/mm²) | CV (%) | HEX (%) | |-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|----------------------|--------------------|------------------| | Center Method | | | | | Average (SD) | 2932.7 (527.83) | 34.0 (5.73) | 59.9 (7.05) | | Median | 2915.9 | 33.2 | 59.9 | | Min – Max | 816 - 4532 | 25 - 52 | 40 - 74 | | Trace Method | | | | | Average (SD) | 2931.7 (531.31) | 29.5 (7.68) | 57.4 (7.78) | | Median | 2897.5 | 28.5 | 58.4 | | Min – Max | 820 - 4565 | 17 - 52 | 38 - 73 | | Method Comparisons | | | | | Average Difference (SD) | -1.0 (28.00) | -4.5 (4.13) | -2.4 (3.39) | | Average Difference (SD) as a % of Center Method reading | -0.03% (0.955%) | -13.34% (12.132%) | -4.06% (5.671%) | | 95% LOA | (-57.0, 55.0) | (-12.8, 3.7) | (-9.2, 4.4) | | Correlation (R2) | 0.9973 | 0.7215 | 0.8097 | | Deming Regression Intercept (95% CI) | -16.3 (-18.1, -14.5) | -9.2 (-11.3, -7.2) | -2.0 (-4.7, 0.7) | | Deming Regression Slope (95% CI) | 1.0 (1.0, 1.0) | 1.1 (1.1, 1.2) | 1.0 (0.9, 1.0) | | Abbreviations: CD = corneal endothelial cell density; Cl = confidence interval; CV = coefficient of | | | | | variation; HEX = hexagonality; LOA = limits of agreement; SD = standard deviation | | | | The average differences were calculated as (Trace Method) - (Center Method). The average differences as a % of Center Method reading were calculated by dividing the average differences with the averages of Center Method. The 95% LOA's were calculated as the average differences +/- 2SD's. {15}------------------------------------------------ (i) CD > Corneal endothelial cell density as measured with Trace Method had the average (SD) of 2931.7 (531.31) compared with those of 2932.7 (527.83) for Center Method. The average difference (SD) were -1.0 (28.00). The Deming regression lines had the associated R2 value of 0.9973. - CV (ii) Corneal endothelial cell density as measured with Trace Method had the average (SD) of 29.5 (7.68) compared with those of 34.0 (5.73) for Center Method. The average difference (SD) were -4.5 (4.13). The Deming regression lines had the associated R2 value of 0.7215. - (iii) HEX Corneal endothelial cell density as measured with Trace Method had the average (SD) of 57.4 (7.78) compared with 59.9 (7.05) for those of Center Method. The average difference (SD) were -2.4 (3.39). The Deming regression lines had the associated R2 value of 0.8097. #### b) Cornea Measuring Area: Center Area Analysis Method: Center Method vs Auto Trance Method of Subject Device Table 4 Three Corneal Specular Microscopic Variables Assessed with Two Analysis Methods -Center Method vs Auto Trance Method - Center Area | N=80 | CD (/mm²) | CV (%) | HEX (%) | |----------------------------------------------------|-----------------|-------------------|-----------------| | Center Method | | | | | Average (SD) | 2932.7 (527.83) | 34.0 (5.73) | 59.9 (7.05) | | Median | 2915.9 | 33.2 | 59.9 | | Min – Max | 816 - 4532 | 25 - 52 | 40 - 74 | | Auto Trace Method | | | | | Average (SD) | 2756.1 (430.05) | 19.5 (4.34) | 59.5 (6.51) | | Median | 2816.0 | 19.0 | 60.0 | | Min – Max | 900 - 3475 | 11 - 35 | 38 - 73 | | Device Comparisons | | | | | Average Difference (SD) | -176.6 (213.31) | -14.5 (3.77) | -0.3 (5.80) | | Average Difference (SD) as a % of Center Method | -6.02% (7.273%) | -42.67% (11.065%) | -0.58% (9.695%) | {16}------------------------------------------------ 510(k) Summary – Konan Specular Microscope XVII, CellChek 20 | reading | | | | |---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|----------------------|-----------------|-------------------| | 95% LOA | (-603.3, 250.0) | (-22.1, -7.0) | (-12.0, 11.3) | | Correlation (R2) | 0.8479 | 0.5682 | 0.4050 | | Deming Regression Intercept (95% CI) | 555.8 (554.2, 557.4) | 0.1 (-1.5, 1.6) | 24.3 (22.1, 26.5) | | Deming Regression Slope (95% CI) | 0.8 (0.7, 0.8) | 0.6 (0.5, 0.6) | 0.6 (0.6, 0.6) | | Abbreviations: CD = corneal endothelial cell density; CI = confidence interval; CV = coefficient of variation; HEX = hexagonality; LOA = limits of agreement; SD = standard deviation | | | | | The average differences were calculated as (Auto Trace Method) - (Center Method). | | | | | The average differences as a % of Center Method reading were calculated by dividing the average differences with the averages of Center Method. | | | | | The 95% LOA's were calculated as the average differences +/- 2SD's. | | | | #### CD (i) Corneal endothelial cell density as measured with Auto Trace Method had the average (SD) of 2756.1 (430.05) compared with those of 2932.7 (527.83) for Center Method. The average difference (SD) were -176.6 (213.31). The Deming regression lines had the associated R2 value of 0.8479. #### (ii) CV Corneal endothelial cell density as measured with Auto Trace Method had the average (SD) of 19.5 (4.34) compared with those of 34.0 (5.73) for Center Method. The average difference (SD) were -14.5 (3.77). The Deming regression lines had the associated R2 value of 0.5682. - HEX (iii) Corneal endothelial cell density as measured with Auto Trace Method had the average (SD) of 59.5 (6.51) compared with those of 59.9 (7.05) for Center Method. The average difference (SD) were -0.3 (5.80). The Deming regression lines had the associated R2 value of 0.4050. {17}------------------------------------------------ #### c) Cornea Measuring Area: Center Area Analysis Method: Center Method vs Auto Center Method of Subject Device Table 5 Three Corneal Specular Microscopic Variables Assessed with Two Analysis Method -Center Method vs Auto Center Method – Center Area | N=80 | CD (/mm²) | CV (%) | HEX (%) | |---------------------------------------------------------------|----------------------|----------------|-------------------| | Center Method | | | | | Average (SD) | 2932.7 (527.83) | 34.0 (5.73) | 59.9 (7.05) | | Median | 2915.9 | 33.2 | 59.9 | | Min - Max | 816 - 4532 | 25 - 52 | 40 - 74 | | Auto Center Method | | | | | Average (SD) | 2777.7 (433.55) | 34.3 (5.83) | 59.8 (6.96) | | Median | 2828.0 | 34.5 | 60.0 | | Min - Max | 921 - 3434 | 24 - 55 | 36 - 71 | | Device Comparisons | | | | | Average Difference (SD) | -155.0 (210.98) | 0.3 (3.39) | -0.1 (4.67) | | Average Difference (SD) as a % of Center Method reading | -5.29% (7.194%) | 0.75% (9.966%) | -0.16% (7.796%) | | 95% LOA | (-577.0, 266.9) | (-6.5, 7.0) | (-9.4, 9.2) | | Correlation (R2) | 0.8504 | 0.6854 | 0.6055 | | Deming Regression Intercept (95% CI) | 556.3 (554.7, 557.9) | 5.6 (3.9, 7.4) | 13.8 (11.4, 16.2) | | Deming Regression Slope (95% CI) | 0.8 (0.8, 0.8) | 0.8 (0.8, 0.9) | 0.8 (0.7, 0.8) | The average differences as a % of Center Method reading were calculated by dividing the average differences with the averages of Center Method. The 95% LOA's were calculated as the average differences +/- 2SD's. {18}------------------------------------------------ CD (i) > Corneal endothelial cell density as measured with Auto Center Method had the average (SD) of 2777.7 (433.55) compared with those of 2932.7 (527.83) for Center Method. The average difference (SD) were -155.0 (210.98). The Deming regression lines had the associated R2 value of 0.8504. - CV (ii) Corneal endothelial cell density as measured with Auto Center Method had the average (SD) of 34.3 (5.83) compared with those of 34.0 (5.73) for Center Method. The average difference (SD) were 0.3 (3.39). The Deming regression lines had the associated R2 value of 0.6854. - (iii) HEX Corneal endothelial cell density as measured with Auto Center Method had the average (SD) of 59.8 (6.96) compared with those of 59.9 (7.05) for Center Method. The average difference (SD) were -0.1 (4.67). The Deming regression lines had the associated R2 value of 0.6055. #### d) Cornea Measuring Area: Center Area Analysis Method: Center Method vs Flex Center Method of Subject Device | Table 6 Three Corneal Specular Microscopic Variables Assessed with Two Analysis Method - | | | |------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--|--| | Center Method vs Flex Center Method – Center Area | | | | N=80 | CD (/mm²) | CV (%) | HEX (%) | |----------------------------------------------------|-----------------|----------------|----------------| | Center Method | | | | | Average (SD) | 2932.7 (527.83) | 34.0 (5.73) | 59.9 (7.05) | | Median | 2915.9 | 33.2 | 59.9 | | Min – Max | 816 - 4532 | 25 - 52 | 40 - 74 | | Flex Center Method | | | | | Average (SD) | 2917.8 (531.26) | 36.0 (5.80) | 59.9 (5.91) | | Median | 2899.2 | 35.0 | 60.2 | | Min – Max | 822 - 4524 | 26 - 57 | 48 - 74 | | Device Comparisons | | | | | Average Difference (SD) | -14.9 (28.88) | 2.0 (1.74) | 0.1 (3.47) | | Average Difference (SD) as a % of Center Method | -0.51% (0.985%) | 5.85% (5.106%) | 0.09% (5.798%) | {19}------------------------------------------------ 510(k) Summary – Konan Specular Microscope XVII, CellChek 20 | reading | | | | |------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|----------------------|----------------|-------------------| | 95% LOA | (-72.6, 42.9) | (-1.5, 5.5) | (-6.9, 7.0) | | Correlation (R2) | 0.9971 | 0.9114 | 0.7587 | | Deming Regression Intercept (95% CI) | -29.6 (-31.4, -27.8) | 3.1 (1.3, 5.0) | 16.2 (13.9, 18.6) | | Deming Regression Slope (95% CI) | 1.0 (1.0, 1.0) | 1.0 (0.9, 1.0) | 0.7 (0.7, 0.8) | | Abbreviations: CD = corneal endothelial cell density; CI = confidence interval; CV = coefficient of variation; HEX = hexagonality; LOA = limits of agreement; SD = standard deviation | | | | | The average differences were calculated as (Flex Center Method) - (Center Method). | | | | The average differences as a % of Center Method reading were calculated by dividing the average differences with the averages of Center Method. The 95% LOA's were calculated as the average differences +/- 2SD's. #### CD (i) Corneal endothelial cell density as measured with Flex Center Method had the average (SD) of 2917.8 (531.26) compared with those of 2932.7 (527.83) for Center Method. The average difference (SD) were -14.9 (28.88). The Deming regression lines had the associated R2 value of 0.9971. #### (ii) CV Corneal endothelial cell density as measured with Flex Center Method had the average (SD) of 36.0 (5.80) compared with those of those of 34.0 (5.73) for Center Method. The average difference (SD) were 2.0 (1.74). The Deming regression lines had the associated R2 value of 0.9114. - HEX (iii) Corneal endothelial cell density as measured with Flex Center Method had the average (SD) of 59.9 (5.91) compared with those of 59.9 (7.05) for Center Method. The average difference (SD) were 0.1 (3.47). The Deming regression lines had the associated R2 value of 0.7587. {20}------------------------------------------------ #### Cornea Measuring Area: Center Area e) Analysis Method: Center Method vs Auto Flex Center Method of Subject Device | Table 7 Three Corneal Specular Microscopic Variables Assessed with Two Analysis Method - | | | | | |------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--|--|--|--| | Center Method vs Auto Flex Center Method – Center Area | | | | | | N=80 | CD (/mm²) | CV (%) | HEX (%) | |-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|----------------------|-----------------|-------------------| | Center Method | | | | | Average (SD) | 2932.7 (527.83) | 34.0 (5.73) | 59.9 (7.05) | | Median | 2915.9 | 33.2 | 59.9 | | Min – Max | 816 - 4532 | 25 - 52 | 40 - 74 | | Auto Flex Center Method | | | | | Average (SD) | 2760.8 (433.37) | 35.1 (5.84) | 59.6 (6.83) | | Median | 2835.0 | 35.0 | 60.0 | | Min – Max | 905 - 3415 | 24 - 58 | 38 - 70 | | Device Comparisons | | | | | Average Difference (SD) | -172.0 (212.44) | 1.1 (3.60) | -0.3 (5.59) | | Average Difference (SD) as a % of Center Method reading | -5.86% (7.244%) | 3.21% (10.586%) | -0.47% (9.342%) | | 95% LOA | (-596.9, 252.9) | (-6.1, 8.3) | (-11.5, 10.9) | | Correlation ( $R^2$ ) | 0.8480 | 0.6499 | 0.4564 | | Deming Regression Intercept (95% CI) | 543.5 (541.9, 545.0) | 7.2 (5.4, 8.9) | 20.4 (18.1, 22.7) | | Deming Regression Slope (95% CI) | 0.8 (0.8, 0.8) | 0.8 (0.8, 0.9) | 0.7 (0.6, 0.7) | | Abbreviations: CD = corneal endothelial cell density; Cl = confidence interval; CV = coefficient of | | | | | variation; HEX = hexagonality; LOA = limits of agreement; SD = standard deviation | | | | | The average differences were calculated as (Auto Flex Center Method) - (Center Method). | | | | | The average differences as a % of Center Method reading were calculated by dividing the average | | | | differences with the averages of Center Method. The 95% LOA's were calculated as the average differences +/- 2SD's. {21}------------------------------------------------ CD (i) > Corneal endothelial cell density as measured with Auto Flex Center had the average (SD) of 2760.8 (433.37) compared with those of 2932.7 (527.83) for Center Method. The average difference (SD) were -172.0 (212.44). The Deming regression lines had the associated R2 value of 0.8480. - CV (ii) Corneal endothelial cell density as measured with Auto Flex Center had the average (SD) of 35.1 (5.84) compared with those of 34.0 (5.73) for Center Method. The average difference (SD) were 1.1 (3.60). The Deming regression lines had the associated R2 value of 0.6499. - (iii) HEX Corneal endothelial cell density as measured with Auto Flex Center had the average (SD) of 59.6 (6.83) compared with those of 59.9 (7.05) for Center Method. The average difference (SD) were -0.3 (5.59). The Deming regression lines had the associated R2 value of 0.4564. - III. Precision Analysis - Cornea Measuring Area: Center Area 1) Analysis Method: Center Method of Subject Device vs Center Method of Reference Device Table 8 Precision Analyses for Center Method of Subject Device vs Center Method of Reference Device - Center Area | Variable | Konan Specular Microscope XVII, CellChek 20 (Subject Device) Center Method | NONCON ROBO PACHY F&A (Reference Device) Center Method | |-----------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------| | CD | | | | Repeatability SD | 9.1 | 9.8 | | Repeatability SD as a% of the Average | 0.3% | 0.4% | | Repeatability limit | 25.5 | 27.4 | | Repeatability Ratio (CellChek 20/F&A) | 0.9286 | ----- | | Reproducibility SD | 53.2 | 99.3 | | Reproducibility SD as a% of the Average | 1.8% | 3.8% | | Reproducibility limit | 149.0 | 278.0 | | Reproducibility Ratio (CellChek 20/F&A) | 0.5358 | ----- | | CV | | | | Repeatability SD | 0.4 | 0.6 | {22}------------------------------------------------ | 310(k) Summary - Konan Specular Microscope XVII, CellChek 20 | | | |--------------------------------------------------------------|--------|-------| | Repeatability SD as a% of the Average | 1.2% | 1.8% | | Repeatability limit | 1.1 | 1.7 | | Repeatability Ratio (CellChek 20/F&A) | 0.6667 | ----- | | Reproducibility SD | 0.9 | 3.2 | | Reproducibility SD as a% of the Average | 2.7% | 9.1% | | Reproducibility limit | 2.5 | 9.0 | | Reproducibility Ratio (CellChek 20/F&A) | 0.2813 | ----- | | HEX | | | | Repeatability SD | 0.8 | 1.2 | | Repeatability SD as a% of the Average | 1.3% | 2.1% | | Repeatability limit | 2.2 | 3.4 | | Repeatability Ratio (CellChek 20/F&A) | 0.6667 | ----- | | Reproducibility SD | 1.3 | 2.2 | | Reproducibility SD as a% of the Average | 2.2% | 3.8% | | Reproducibility limit | 3.6 | 6.2 | | Reproducibility Ratio (CellChek 20/F&A) | 0.5909 | ----- | 510(k) Summary – Konan Specular Microscope XVII. CellChek 20 The repeatability limit was 2.8 times the repeatability standard deviation, which is the square root of the residual within subject variance component. The reproducibility limit is 2.8 times the reproducibility standard deviation, which is the square root of the sum of the variance components of operator + device, operator + device x subject interaction, and residual within subject. #### Cornea Measuring Area: Center Area 2) Analysis Method: Trace Method of Subject Device vs Center Method of Reference Device Table 9 Precision Analyses for Trace Method of Subject Device vs Center Method of Reference Device – Center Area | Variable | Konan Specular Microscope XVII, CellChek 20 (Subject Device) Trace Method | NONCON ROBO PACHY F&A (Reference Device) Center Method | |-----------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------| | CD | | | | Repeatability SD | 12.1 | 9.8 | | Repeatability SD as a% of the Average | 0.4% | 0.4% | | Repeatability limit | 33.9 | 27.4 | | Repeatability Ratio (CellChek 20/F&A) | 1.2347 | ------- | | Reproducibility SD | 38.6 | 99.3 | | Reproducibility SD as a% of the Average | 1.3% | 3.8% | | Reproducibility limit | 108.1 | 278.0 | | Reproducibility Ratio (CellChek 20/F&A) | 0.3887 | ------- | | CV | | | {23}------------------------------------------------ | Repeatability SD | 0.9 | 0.6 | |-----------------------------------------|--------|-------| | Repeatability SD as a% of the Average | 3.1% | 1.8% | | Repeatability limit | 2.5 | 1.7 | | Repeatability Ratio (CellChek 20/F&A) | 1.5000 | ----- | | Reproducibility SD | 2.8 | 3.2 | | Reproducibility SD as a% of the Average | 8.9% | 9.1% | | Reproducibility limit | 7.8 | 9.0 | | Reproducibility Ratio (CellChek 20/F&A) | 0.8750 | ----- | | HEX | | | | Repeatability SD | 0.6 | 1.2 | | Repeatability SD as a% of the Average | 1.0% | 2.1% | | Repeatability limit | 1.7 | 3.4 | | Repeatability Ratio (CellChek 20/F&A) | 0.5000 | ----- | | Reproducibility SD | 1.7 | 2.2 | | Reproducibility SD as a% of the Average | 3.0% | 3.8% | | Reproducibility limit | 4.8 | 6.2 | | Reproducibility Ratio (CellChek 20/F&A) | 0.7727 | ----- | 510(k) Summary – Konan Specular Microscope XVII, CellChek 20 The repeatability limit was 2.8 times the repeatability standard deviation, which is the square root of the residual within subject variance component. The reproducibility limit is 2.8 times the reproducibility standard deviation, which is the square root of the sum of the variance components of operator + device, operator + device x subject interaction, and residual within subject. - Cornea Measuring Area: Center Area 3) Analysis Method: Auto Trace Method of Subject Device vs Center Method of Reference Device Table 10 Precision Analyses for Auto Trace Method of Subject Device vs Center Method of Reference Device – Center Area | Variable | Konan Specular Microscope XVII, CellChek 20 (Subject Device) Auto Trace Method | NONCON ROBO PACHY F&A (Reference Device) Center Method | |-----------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------| | CD | | | | Repeatability SD | 0.0 | 9.8 | | Repeatability SD as a% of the Average | 0.0% | 0.4% | | Repeatability limit | 0.0 | 27.4 | | Repeatability Ratio (CellChek 20/F&A) | 0.0000 | ----- | | Reproducibility SD | 22.4 | 99.3 | | Reproducibility SD as a% of the Average | 0.8% | 3.8% | | Reproducibility limit | 62.7 | 278.0 | | Reproducibility Ratio (CellChek 20/F&A) | 0.2256 | ----- | {24}------------------------------------------------ | CV | | | |-----------------------------------------|--------|-------| | Repeatability SD | 0.0 | 0.6 | | Repeatability SD as a% of the Average | 0.0% | 1.8% | | Repeatability limit | 0.0 | 1.7 | | Repeatability Ratio (CellChek 20/F&A) | 0.0000 | ----- | | Reproducibility SD | 0.7 | 3.2 | | Reproducibility SD as a% of the Average | 3.6% | 9.1% | | Reproducibility limit | 2.0 | 9.0 | | Reproducibility Ratio (CellChek 20/F&A) | 0.2188 | ----- | | HEX | | | | Repeatability SD | 0.0 | 1.2 | | Repeatability SD as a% of the Average | 0.0% | 2.1% | | Repeatability limit | 0.0 | 3.4 | | Repeatability Ratio (CellChek 20/F&A) | 0.0000 | ----- | | Reproducibility SD | 1.4 | 2.2 | | Reproducibility SD as a% of the Average | 2.4% | 3.8% | | Reproducibility limit…

Konan Specular Microscope XVII

Device Facts

Intended Use

Device Story

Clinical Evidence

Technological Characteristics

Indications for Use

Regulatory Classification

Identification

Special Controls

Predicate Devices

Reference Devices

Related Devices

Submission Summary (Full Text)

Panel 1

Section Matches

Product Code Matches

Special Control Matches

My Alerts

Konan Specular Microscope XVII

Device Facts

Intended Use

Device Story

Clinical Evidence

Technological Characteristics

Indications for Use

Regulatory Classification

Identification

Special Controls

Predicate Devices

Reference Devices

Related Devices

Submission Summary (Full Text)

Panel 1

Section Matches

Product Code Matches

Special Control Matches

My Alerts

Create Alert

Search Filters

Agent Token

Welcome

Check your email

Welcome!