K070104 · Diamond Diagnostics, Inc. · JGS · May 7, 2008 · Clinical Chemistry
Device Facts
Record ID
K070104
Device Name
PROLYTE ELECTROLYTE ANALYZER
Applicant
Diamond Diagnostics, Inc.
Product Code
JGS · Clinical Chemistry
Decision Date
May 7, 2008
Decision
SESE
Submission Type
Traditional
Regulation
21 CFR 862.1665
Device Class
Class 2
Indications for Use
The proLYTE Electrolyte Analyzer is designed for clinical laboratory use by laboratory professionals to assess the levels of Sodium, Potassium, and Chloride found in whole blood, serum, plasma, and urine of patients. The analysis is performed in-vitro, and neither the analyzer nor any of its components come in contact with the patient. This analyzer is used by laboratory trained technicians in clinical laboratories to aid in the diagnosis and treatment of patients with electrolyte imbalance. These locations routinely conform to CLIA regulations, and conduct daily quality control programs. For In Vitro Diagnostic Use
Device Story
Automated, microprocessor-controlled analyzer; utilizes ion-selective electrodes (ISE) to measure sodium, potassium, and chloride levels in whole blood, serum, plasma, or prediluted urine. Operated by laboratory technicians in clinical settings; provides results in approximately 55 seconds for blood and 90 seconds for urine. Device features simple menu navigation; performs automatic 1-point calibration per measurement and scheduled 2-point calibrations. Output displayed on-screen and sent to printer/computer; stores up to 125 patient results and 20 QC results. Aids clinicians in diagnosing and managing renal, metabolic, and cardiovascular disorders by identifying electrolyte imbalances.
Clinical Evidence
Bench testing only. Precision evaluated via 40 replicates across matrices (whole blood, serum, plasma, urine) at low/high concentrations. Linearity confirmed via dilution studies across claimed ranges (R² ≥ 0.995). Method comparison performed against predicate device using patient samples (n=42-69 per matrix/analyte); results showed strong correlation. Analytical specificity tested against common interferents; interference noted for bromide, thiocyanate, and albumin at specific concentrations.
Indicated for patients requiring assessment of Sodium, Potassium, and Chloride levels in whole blood, serum, plasma, or urine to aid in the diagnosis and treatment of electrolyte imbalance.
Regulatory Classification
Identification
A sodium test system is a device intended to measure sodium in serum, plasma, and urine. Measurements obtained by this device are used in the diagnosis and treatment of aldosteronism (excessive secretion of the hormone aldosterone), diabetes insipidus (chronic excretion of large amounts of dilute urine, accompanied by extreme thirst), adrenal hypertension, Addison's disease (caused by destruction of the adrenal glands), dehydration, inappropriate antidiuretic hormone secretion, or other diseases involving electrolyte imbalance.
Predicate Devices
Medica EasyLYTE (k000926)
Submission Summary (Full Text)
{0}
1
510(k) SUBSTANTIAL EQUIVALENCE DETERMINATION
DECISION SUMMARY
ASSAY AND INSTRUMENT COMBINATION TEMPLATE
A. 510(k) Number:
k070104
B. Purpose for Submission:
New Device
C. Measurand:
Sodium, Potassium, Chloride
D. Type of Test:
Ion Selective Electrode
E. Applicant:
Diamond Diagnostics, Inc.
F. Proprietary and Established Names:
proLYTE Electrolyte Analyzer
G. Regulatory Information:
1. Regulation section:
21 CFR 862.1665 – Sodium Test System
21 CFR 862.1600 – Potassium Test System
21 CFR 862.1770 – Chloride Test System
2. Classification:
Class II
3. Product code:
{1}
JGS - Electrode, Ion Specific, Sodium
CEM – Electrode, Ion Specific, Potassium
CGZ – Electrode, Ion Specific, Chloride
4. Panel:
75 - Chemistry
## H. Intended Use:
1. Intended use(s):
See indications for use below.
2. Indication(s) for use:
The proLYTE Electrolyte Analyzer is designed for clinical laboratory use by laboratory professionals to assess the levels of Sodium, Potassium, and Chloride found in whole blood, serum, plasma, and urine of patients. The analysis is performed in-vitro, and neither the analyzer nor any of its components come in contact with the patient.
This analyzer is used by laboratory trained technicians in clinical laboratories to aid in the diagnosis and treatment of patients with electrolyte imbalance. These locations routinely conform to CLIA regulations, and conduct daily quality control programs.
For In Vitro Diagnostic Use
3. Special conditions for use statement(s):
For prescription use only
4. Special instrument requirements:
proLYTE Electrolyte Analyzer
## I. Device Description:
The proLYTE is an automated, microprocessor-controlled analyzer which utilizes ion-selective electrodes for the measurement of sodium, potassium and chloride in serum, plasma, whole blood and prediluted urine samples.
## J. Substantial Equivalence Information:
1. Predicate device name(s):
{2}
Medica EasyLYTE
2. Predicate 510(k) number(s):
k000926
3. Comparison with predicate:
| Similarities | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Item | Device | Predicate |
| Measurement Method | Ion selective electrode | Ion selective electrode |
| Analytes measured | sodium, potassium, chloride | sodium, potassium, chloride |
| Sample matrix | Whole blood, plasma, serum, urine | Whole blood, plasma, serum, urine |
| Calibration | Automatic and on demand | Automatic and on demand |
| Differences | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Item | Device | Predicate |
| Measuring range whole blood, serum, plasma | Na: 45-210 mmol/L, K: 1.5-12 mmol/L Cl: 45-210 mmol/L | Na: 80-200 mmol/L, Cl: 1-10 mmol/L K: 80-200 mmol/L |
| Measuring range urine | Na: 30-1020 mmol/L, K: 20-505 mmol/L Cl: 25-506 mmol/L | Na: 80-200 mmol/L, Cl: 1-10 mmol/L K: 80-200 mmol/L |
| Blood analysis time | 57 seconds | 55 seconds |
| Urine analysis time | 93 seconds | 90 seconds |
| QC storage | Normal, abnormal 20 each | Normal, low, high, 20 each |
## K. Standard/Guidance Document Referenced (if applicable):
None referenced
## L. Test Principle:
The proLYTE measures sodium, potassium and chloride in whole blood, serum, plasma, and urine, using ion selective electrode technology. The flow-through sodium electrode contains a glass tube, specially formulated to be sensitive to sodium ions. The flow-through potassium and chloride electrodes incorporate a neutral carrier ionophore membrane. The potential of each electrode is measured relative to a fixed, stable voltage established by the silver/silver chloride reference electrode. An ion selective electrode develops a voltage that varies with the concentration of the ion to which it responds. The relationship between the voltage developed and the concentration of the sensed ion is logarithmic.
{3}
M. Performance Characteristics (if/when applicable):
1. Analytical performance:
a. Precision/Reproducibility:
Within run precision was calculated with results from three whole blood, serum, plasma, and urine samples for each analyte. The samples concentrations were at the low and high end of the measuring range and within the measuring range. The protocol called for running 40 replicates of each sample without calibration between measurements. The replicates were run consecutively in one day. Some of the samples had fewer replicates due to instrument errors. The results are summarized below.
Whole Blood
| | Na+ | K+ | Cl- | Na+ | K+ | Cl- | Na+ | K+ | Cl- |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Mean | 114.6 | 2.27 | 51.3 | 139.5 | 3.91 | 91.1 | 162.6 | 6.15 | 120.7 |
| %CV | 0.9 | 1.7 | 2.0 | 0.8 | 1.5 | 0.9 | 0.6 | 1.4 | 0.9 |
| n | 39 | 39 | 39 | 39 | 39 | 39 | 39 | 39 | 39 |
Serum
| | Na+ | K+ | Cl- | Na+ | K+ | Cl- | Na+ | Cl- |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Mean | 115.9 | 3.17 | 66.6 | 145.5 | 6.63 | 99.1 | 163.5 | 109.8 |
| %CV | 0.7 | 1.1 | 1.9 | 0.6 | 0.8 | 1.1 | 0.7 | 0.5 |
| n | 40 | 40 | 40 | 40 | 40 | 40 | 40 | 40 |
Plasma
| | Na+ | K+ | Cl- | Na+ | K+ | Cl- | Na+ | K+ | Cl- |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Mean | 114.2 | 2.77 | 46.4 | 139.6 | 3.87 | 80.4 | 161.8 | 6.53 | 113.4 |
| %CV | 0.9 | 1.9 | 2.0 | 0.7 | 0.8 | 0.9 | 0.6 | 1.0 | 0.9 |
| n | 34 | 34 | 34 | 34 | 34 | 34 | 34 | 34 | 34 |
Urine
| | Na+ | K+ | Cl- | Na+ | K+ | Cl- | Na+ | K+ | Cl- |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Mean | 60.9 | 31.12 | 78.6 | 173.3 | 104.15 | 156.4 | 279.8 | 168.83 | 231.9 |
| %CV | 0.9 | 1.5 | 2.0 | 0.6 | 0.7 | 1.9 | 0.8 | 1.0 | 0.8 |
| n | 34 | 34 | 34 | 35 | 35 | 35 | 35 | 35 | 35 |
Total precision was calculated with results from three whole blood, serum, plasma, and urine samples for each analyte. The samples concentrations were at the low and high end of the measuring range and within the measuring range. The samples were measured twice each morning and twice each afternoon for ten consecutive days resulting in $n = 40$ replicates. One whole blood sample and three urine samples had $n = 39$ replicates due to instrument errors. The results are summarized below.
Whole Blood
{4}
| | Na+ | K+ | Cl- | Na+ | K+ | Cl- | Na+ | K+ | Cl- |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Mean | 115.7 | 2.43 | 47.1 | 140.2 | 4.32 | 90.2 | 164.0 | 6.46 | 119.6 |
| %CV | 1.3 | 4.1 | 2.5 | 0.8 | 2.3 | 1.1 | 0.7 | 2.1 | 0.9 |
| n | 40 | 40 | 39 | 40 | 40 | 40 | 40 | 40 | 40 |
Serum
| | Na+ | K+ | Cl- | Na+ | K+ | Cl- | Na+ | Cl- |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Mean | 113.5 | 2.65 | 48.7 | 117.2 | 4.00 | 91.6 | 144.6 | 132.1 |
| %CV | 1.8 | 2.5 | 2.5 | 0.9 | 1.5 | 1.2 | 0.4 | 0.6 |
| n | 40 | 40 | 40 | 40 | 40 | 40 | 40 | 40 |
Plasma
| | K+ | Cl- | Na+ | K+ | Cl- | Na+ | K+ | Cl- |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Mean | 1.8 | 53.5 | 140.5 | 3.85 | 81.1 | 162.5 | 6.61 | 114.8 |
| %CV | 1.5 | 1.5 | 0.9 | 1.2 | 1.4 | 1.0 | 2.4 | 1.1 |
| n | 40 | 40 | 40 | 40 | 40 | 40 | 40 | 40 |
Urine
| | Na+ | K+ | Cl- | Na+ | K+ | Cl- | Na+ | K+ | Cl- |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Mean | 30.1 | 41.79 | 55.9 | 60.1 | 30.4 | 80.2 | 176.1 | 101.9 | 160.6 |
| %CV | 2.2 | 1.2 | 2.7 | 1.6 | 2.5 | 1.83 | 1.31 | 2.90 | 1.8 |
| n | 39 | 39 | 39 | 40 | 40 | 40 | 40 | 40 | 40 |
## b. Linearity/assay reportable range:
Linearity was evaluated by preparing stock solutions with high concentrations of $\mathrm{Na+}$ , $\mathrm{K+}$ , and $\mathrm{Cl-}$ in whole blood, plasma, serum, and urine. These stocks were diluted to concentrations across the measuring ranges of each analyte and matrix. Linear regression was performed on the results using expected values based on the stock sample dilution. The reportable ranges claimed for whole blood, serum, and plasma are $45 - 210\mathrm{mmol / L}$ for sodium and chloride and $1.5 - 12\mathrm{mmol / L}$ for potassium. The reportable ranges claimed for urine are $30 - 1020\mathrm{mmol / L}$ for sodium, $20 - 505\mathrm{mmol / L}$ for potassium, and $25 - 506\mathrm{mmol / L}$ for chloride. The results are shown below.
Whole Blood
| Parameter | Slope | Intercept | R2 | Conc. Tested | Measuring Range |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Sodium | 1.04 | -10.99 | 0.999 | 13 – 244 | 45-210 |
| Potassium | 1.02 | -0.29 | 0.998 | 1.4 – 37 | 1.5-12 |
| Chloride | 1.04 | -4.32 | 0.998 | 17- 239 | 45-210 |
Plasma
| Parameter | Slope | Intercept | R2 | Conc. Tested | Measuring Range |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Sodium | 1.03 | -11.92 | 0.995 | 35-247 | 45-210 |
| Potassium | 1.00 | 0.04 | 0.999 | 1.4 – 15 | 1.5-12 |
| Chloride | 1.02 | -6.72 | 0.999 | 30-230 | 45-210 |
{5}
6
Serum
| Parameter | Slope | Intercept | R2 | Conc. Tested | Measuring Range |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Sodium | 0.99 | 2.67 | 0.999 | 48 – 250 | 45-210 |
| Potassium | 0.98 | 0.44 | 0.998 | 1.5 – 14.5 | 1.5-12 |
| Chloride | 1.05 | -12.10 | 1.000 | 26-216 | 45-210 |
Urine
| Parameter | Slope | Intercept | R2 | Conc. Tested | Measuring Range |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Sodium | 1.00 | -3.1 | 0.999 | 25 – 1055 | 30-1020 |
| Potassium | 1.00 | 5.5 | 0.999 | 18 – 530 | 20-505 |
| Chloride | 1.02 | -8.4 | 0.999 | 30- 920 | 25-506 |
c. Traceability, Stability, Expected values (controls, calibrators, or methods):
Calibrators were previously cleared under k031159.
d. Detection limit:
Reportable ranges were determined based on the linearity studies (see above).
e. Analytical specificity:
Plasma samples were prepared with high and low concentrations of sodium (129 and 151 mmol/L), potassium (3 and 5.7 mmol/L), and chloride (84 and 115 mmol/L). Interferents were added to these samples and tested. The results were compared to sodium, potassium, and chloride samples without interferent. No interference was defined by the sponsor as a difference of <2 mmol/L for sodium, <0.25 mmol/L for potassium, and <2.8 mmol/L for chloride. The following compounds did not interfere with the results: Salicylic acid at 5 mM, Bilirubin at 500 uM, Triglycerides at 30 mM, Lithium at 3.2 mM, and 40% hematocrit. Albumin, Bromide, and Thiocyanate did cause interference at the concentrations shown below.
| Interferent | Concentration |
| --- | --- |
| Bromide | 3 mmol/L |
| Thiocyanate | 2 mmol/L |
| Albumin | 20 g/L |
f. Assay cut-off:
No Applicable
2. Comparison studies:
a. Method comparison with predicate device:
{6}
Method comparisons to predicate devices were performed with whole blood, plasma, serum and urine patient samples. A small number of samples were spiked or diluted to fully span the claimed measuring ranges. The results are summarized below.
| | Whole Blood | | | | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | slope | intercept | R² | n | conc. tested |
| Sodium | 1.04 | -3.67 | .985 | 55 | 46.7-204.8 |
| Potassium | 0.91 | 0.44 | .981 | 58 | 1.59-10.14 |
| Chloride | 1.01 | -1.11 | .987 | 57 | 47.8-201.4 |
| | Plasma | | | | |
| | slope | intercept | R² | n | conc. tested |
| Sodium | 1.06 | -8.33 | .991 | 46 | 46.8-205.5 |
| Potassium | 0.97 | 0.15 | .007 | 44 | 1.58-10.99 |
| Chloride | 1.02 | -3.45 | .987 | 47 | 49.3-193.4 |
| | Serum | | | | |
| | slope | intercept | R² | N | conc. tested |
| Sodium | 1.07 | -8.41 | .992 | 69 | 48.7-205.4 |
| Potassium | 0.90 | 0.44 | .995 | 65 | 1.70-10.26 |
| Chloride | 1.08 | -8.82 | .988 | 64 | 48.9-199.1 |
| | Urine | | | | |
| | slope | intercept | R² | n | conc. tested |
| Sodium | 1.07 | -9.15 | 0.999 | 43 | 34.5-1012 |
| Potassium | 1.04 | -3.91 | 0.996 | 42 | 21.9-503.1 |
| Chloride | 1.00 | -8.43 | 0.996 | 42 | 27.9-505.3 |
b. Matrix comparison:
Assay performance in all claimed matrices is addressed in the method comparison studies described above.
3. Clinical studies:
a. Clinical Sensitivity: Not Applicable
b. Clinical specificity: Not Applicable
c. Other clinical supportive data (when a. and b. are not applicable): Not Applicable
4. Clinical cut-off:
{7}
Not applicable
5. Expected values/Reference range:
The value given in the tables below are intended to be used only as a guide. Each laboratory or testing site should establish its own range of normal values, taking into account factors such as age, sex, diet, and other determinants of electrolyte levels.
Whole Blood, Serum, Plasma (mmol/L or mEq/L)
Sodium (Na+) 135 to 148
Potassium (K+) 3.5 to 5.3
Chloride (Cl-) 98 to 107
Urine (mmoL/L or mEq/L) spot
Sodium (Na+) 40 to 220
Potassium (K+) 25 to 120
Chloride (Cl-) 110 to 250
1 Tietz, N.W. (ed.) Fundamentals of Clinical Chemistry, 2nd ed. (1976), p. 875-77
2 Geige Scientific Tables, Vol. 3, 8th edition
N. Instrument Name:
Diamond Diagnostics proLYTE Electrolyte Analyzer
O. System Descriptions:
1. Modes of Operation:
Fully automated with 'Yes' or 'No' commands for menu navigation.
2. Software:
FDA has reviewed applicant's Hazard Analysis and software development processes for this line of product types:
Yes ☐ X or No ☐
3. Specimen Identification:
{8}
Manual
4. Specimen Sampling and Handling:
Samples are manually placed on the instrument one at a time, tested, and removed.
5. Calibration:
One point automated on board calibration performed every four hours or upon request. The slope is calculated during calibration and stored for sample measurement.
6. Quality Control:
Controls are run manually and recommended daily. Results can be stored in instrument memory for future use.
P. Other Supportive Instrument Performance Characteristics Data Not Covered In The "Performance Characteristics" Section above:
Not applicable
Q. Proposed Labeling:
The labeling is sufficient and it satisfies the requirements of 21 CFR Part 809.10.
R. Conclusion:
The submitted information in this premarket notification is complete and supports a substantial equivalence decision.
9
Predicate graph will load when search results are available.
Embedding visualization will load when search results are available.
PDF viewer will load when search results are available.
Loading panels...
Select an item from Submissions
Click any panel, subpart, regulation, product code, or device to see details here.
Section Matches
Results will appear here.
Product Code Matches
Results will appear here.
Special Control Matches
Results will appear here.
Loading collections...
Loading
My Alerts
You will receive email notifications based on the filters and frequency you set for each alert.
Sort by:
Create Alert
Search Filters
Agent Token
Create a read-only bearer token for Claude, ChatGPT, or other agents that can call HTTP APIs.
Copy this now. It will not be shown again.
Connected apps
Apps you authorized through browser sign-in. Disconnecting revokes their access immediately.
Learn the FDA Browser
Two short videos show you everything — or skip straight to the written tutorial if you'd rather read. You can reopen this any time from the Tutorial button in the top bar.
Part 1 — Search, results, and everyday workflows 16 min
Part 2 — Embeddings: the galaxy map 3 min
1. Search: exact and fuzzy
Type a phrase like "coronary artery calcification" into the search box. You get two kinds of results. Exact results match the literal phrase — prefix searches work ("coronary artery calcificati") but suffix searches do not. Fuzzy results match on the meaning and intent of your phrase rather than the exact words, and are sorted by relevance score. Hover over the Exact or Fuzzy badge on any row to see exactly why it matched.
Use the checkboxes above the results to narrow: SaMD keeps only software-only devices, AI / ML keeps only devices with AI.
Exact vs. fuzzy search: what's the difference?
Exact matches on the literal phrase (prefix search works, suffix does not). Fuzzy matches on the meaning and intent of the phrase rather than the exact words. Hover over the badge on any row to see why it matched.
You search "coronary artery calcification" and want only software devices with AI. What two filters do you apply?
Narrow by SaMD (software-only devices), then narrow by AI/ML (devices with AI).
2. The results table
Scroll right in the results table. The intended use is extracted for you — no need to open the PDF. The device story gives a high-level snapshot of what the device does and how it's used. The AI Performance sub-table shows each output name, acceptance criteria, observed values, and development/test dataset descriptions — the same format Innolitics uses for regulatory strategy outputs, and the fastest high-level fingerprint of an AI device. It is AI-generated but has been very reliable in practice.
Where do you find a device's intended use without opening the PDF?
Scroll right in the search results table. The intended use column is extracted for you; no need to dig into the 510(k) summary PDF.
What does the AI Performance sub-table show, and why is it useful?
Output name, acceptance criteria, observed values, development dataset description, and test dataset description. It's the same format we use for regulatory strategy output and Fast 510(k) input, and the fastest high-level fingerprint of an AI device. AI-generated but reliable in practice.
3. Judging fuzzy relevance
Fuzzy results trail off in relevance as you scroll. Use three signals to decide how far down to go: the fuzzy badge explanations, the intended use column, and whether your target output (e.g., Cobb angle) still appears in the AI Performance sub-table. Once it stops appearing, you're past the relevant zone. A top hit with a low score (~0.4) and a stretched explanation is a hint the closest predicates are far away — the project may be headed for De Novo. Note the fuzzy search is a pattern match: it doesn't handle negation ("not") well, and hardware devices can appear — filter by SaMD/AI ML to cut them.
How do you judge how far down fuzzy search results to go?
Use the relevancy signals: the fuzzy badge explanations, the intended use column, and whether the target output (e.g., Cobb angle) still appears in the AI Performance sub-table. Once it stops appearing, results are trailing off in relevancy.
4. Device detail page: chat and citations
Click a device name to open its detail page: device facts on the left, a chat window on the right. Ask something like "Describe the training data". The answer carries little citation bubbles — click one to jump to the highlighted passage in the source PDF, so you can verify every AI answer against the document. There's also a Download PDF button for sharing.
How do you verify an AI chat answer on the device detail page?
Click the citation bubbles to jump to the relevant highlight in the source document.
Reading rule for every project: how many summaries do you read in full?
At least the three most relevant 510(k) or De Novo summaries, in full. After that, use targeted chat questions to confirm your memory quickly. The tool supports this professional habit — it doesn't replace it.
5. Side-by-side comparison
Select multiple rows in the results table (aim for under ~10), then open the PDF Viewer tab. Ask one question — it goes to all selected devices in parallel, each with citations. This is the fastest way to compare and contrast devices: training data, PCCP scope, how they handled adding new scanners, and so on.
What does the side-by-side PDF viewer mode do?
Select multiple devices, open the PDF viewer tab, and ask one question (e.g., "Describe the training data"). It queries all selected devices simultaneously with citations, so you can compare and contrast quickly.
6. Collections
With rows selected, go to the Collections tab and create a labeled collection (e.g., "Cobb Angle Project"). Reload that selection any time — before a client call, pull up the collection and ask questions across all of its devices at once.
How do you save a set of selected devices for later use?
Select the rows, go to the Collections tab, and create a labeled collection (e.g., "Cobb Angle Project"). You can reload the selection anytime and carry it into the PDF viewer and other tabs that support selections.
7. Product codes and the regulations tree
Click a product code in the results to jump to it in the regulations tree — identification text, sibling product codes, and devices you can open in a PDF viewer on the right. Click a regulation number to see its identification, special controls, and related product codes. You can also search by product code or regulation number at the top of the tree. Always read the special controls if any exist for your device — it broadens your search and sharpens pre-kickoff research.
What can you do from the regulations tree view?
Browse product codes and regulation numbers, read the identification text and special controls, browse sibling product codes, open device PDFs on the right, and search by product code or regulation number at the top of the tree.
8. Chart view
Click Show Chart and segment by regulation number (or product code) to see which regulations dominate your result set. Clicking a regulation takes you into the regulations tree. Great for spotting that most matches are, say, hardware laparoscopic devices — a cue to go back and filter.
How do you see which regulations dominate a search result set?
Click "Show Chart" and segment by Regulation Number. Clicking a regulation takes you to the regulations tree.
9. The predicate graph
Open the Predicates tab for a family-tree view of predicate relationships. Click a node to trace its parents and children; selections from search carry over pre-selected. Commonly predicated devices are worth reading — a lot of people predicated them for a reason. The visual lineage is also handy on client calls, e.g. to show how a predicate family evolved and justify why your predicate still holds.
In the predicate graph, why are commonly predicated devices worth reading?
A lot of people predicated them for a reason. Clicking a node traces parents and children, and selections from search carry over pre-selected.
10. Embeddings: the galaxy map
The Embeddings tab plots every matching document in a 2-D "galaxy map" where semantically similar devices cluster together. Hover or click clusters to explore, and let AI label the clusters for you. Embeddings beat product codes for grouping: two devices can carry different product codes (LLZ vs. QIH) yet do the same thing — the embedding captures the meaning of the intended use and device story. This is also exactly how retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) works under the hood, and it makes a great visual on client calls.
Try it yourself
Head to the search page and work through a few of these AI/ML fuzzy searches to build intuition: perivascular fat on CT · aortic valve calcification opportunistic screening on noncontrast CT · breast cancer prediction on digital pathology slides · autism detection · gestational age prediction · a hearing aid that can also detect a pulse · foundation model based analysis of ECG · large language models · penetration test. Watch how the relevance scores, intended use, and AI Performance tables tell you when results stop being meaningful.