The Nidek Specular Microscope CEM-530 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
Non-contact ophthalmic microscope, optical pachymeter, and camera; captures high-magnification images of corneal endothelium; analyzes cell size, shape, density, and area; measures corneal thickness optically. Used in clinical settings by eye care professionals. Features auto-tracking and auto-shooting. Outputs include screen display, built-in thermal printer, or LAN-connected external filing systems. Assists clinicians in surgical planning, postoperative monitoring, and managing corneal health. Benefits include non-invasive assessment of endothelial status and corneal thickness.
Clinical Evidence
Prospective clinical study of 74 eyes (non-pathologic young/adult, pathologic adult). Compared CEM-530 to Cellchek Plus. Primary endpoints: endothelial cell density, coefficient of variation (CV) of cell area, % hexagonality, central corneal thickness. Results showed strong agreement for cell density and thickness (high correlation, good Bland-Altman agreement). CV and % hexagonality showed acceptable agreement despite some variability. Repeatability and reproducibility were comparable to predicate.
Technological Characteristics
Non-contact optical microscope/pachymeter; CCD camera; auto-tracking/auto-shooting; built-in thermal printer; LAN connectivity. Electrical safety: IEC 60601-1; EMC: IEC 60601-1-2; Optical safety: ISO 15004-1, ISO 15004-2. Pachymetry accuracy: ±10 microns.
Indications for Use
Indicated for examination of corneal endothelium and measurement of corneal thickness in patients requiring intraocular or corneal surgery, postoperative follow-up, or corneal observation (e.g., endothelial disorders, extended-wear contact lens users).
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.
{0}------------------------------------------------
K130565
#### 510(k) Summary
This summary of the 510(k) premarket notification for the NIDEK Specular Microscope CEM-530 is being submitted in accordance with the requirements of SMDA 1990 and 21 CFR S 807.92.
Date Prepared: November 27, 2013
## SPONSER/ 510(k) OWNER/ MANUFACTURER
NIDEK Co., Ltd. 34-14 Maehama, Hiroishi-cho, Gamagori, Aichi, 443-0038 Japan Telephone: +81-533-67-8901 Facsimile: +81-533-67-6628 E mail: yoneji mizuno@nidek.co.jp Establishment Registration Number: 8030392
**NOV 27 2013**
# CONTACT PERSON
Aron Shapiro Ora, Inc. 300 Brickstone Square Andover, MA 01810 Telephone: (978) 332-9443 Facsimile: (978) 689-0020 E-mail: ashapiro@oraclinical.com
#### NAME OF DEVICE
Trade Name: CEM-530 Common Name: Specular Microscope
#### DEVICE CLASSIFICATION/FDA REVIEWING BRANCH
The Ophthalmic Branch has classified AC Powered Slit Lamp Biomicroscopes as Class II devices pursuant to 21 C.F.R. §886.1850.
## PRODUCT CODE: CLASSIFICATION / CFR TITLE NQE, 21 CFR 886.1850
PREDICATE DEVICE
Konan Medical, Inc. Cellchek Plus (K120264)
{1}------------------------------------------------
#### INDICATIONS FOR USE
The Nidek Specular Microscope CEM-530 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.
## PRODUCT DESCRIPTION
The Nidek Specular Microscope CEM-530 provides non-contact, high magnification image capture of the endothelium enabling observation of the size and shape of cells. Information such as the number of endothelial cells, cell density, and cell area is analyzed through the captured images. The captured images and analysis results of the endothelium are used in intraocular or corneal surgery, postoperative follow-up, and corneal observation such as for endothelial disorders or the corneal state of patients who wear extended-wear contact lenses. Observation is possible in the central area (visual angle: 5°) and peripheral area (visual angle: 27°) using a periphery capture function as well as in the center of the captured images and analysis results can be printed on the built-in printer or optional video printer, or output to an external device over LAN connection. In addition to the specular microscopy, the corneal thickness can be optically measured in a non-contact method. The CEM-530 has auto-tracking and auto-shooting functions. Results can be printed using the the built-in thermal printer or captured images can be transferred to a filing system via LAN connection.
# SUBSTANTIAL EQUIVALENCE
The Specular Microscope CEM-530 is substantially equivalent to the Konan Medical, Inc. Cellchek Plus (K120264). The Specular Microscope CEM-530 has the same intended use and indications for use, technological characteristics, and principles of operation as the previously cleared predicate device. Clinical performance data is provided which demonstrates that the CEM-530 is substantially equivalent to the Konan predicate device.
The CEM-530 and the predicate device are both non-contact ophthalmic microscopes, optical pachymeters, and cameras intended for examination of the corneal endothelium and for measurement of the thickness of the cornea. Both the CEM-530 and the predicate device offer automatic capture features and manual capture modes. Both the CEM-530 and the predicate device have a built-in CCD camera. Slight differences in flash, illumination for focusing and fixation lamps were evaluated in terms of light safety and found to meet the requirements of ISO 15004-2.
Both the CEM-530 and the predicate device include an optical pachymeter with an accuracy of ± l 0 microns. 、
Regarding image analysis, both the CEM-530 and the predicate device offer automatic image analysis while the predicate device also offers manual analysis of images. Clinical performance data is provided which evaluates the precision and accuracy of the automatic analyses performed
{2}------------------------------------------------
by the CEM-530 compared to manual measurements performed with the predicate device. The clinical performance data demonstrates the substantial equivalence of the CEM-530 automatic measurement mode to the predicate device's manual mode.
Both the CEM-S30 and the predicate device comply with applicable electrical safety and light safety standards.
# NON-CLINICAL PERFORMANCE SUMMARY
The performance testing conducted using the NIDEK Specular Microscope CEM-530 verified that the device operates as intended. The specifications to which the CEM-530 was verified to are substantially equivalent to the predicate devices and therefore, support a determination of substantial equivalence. The pachymetry functionality was evaluated in model eyes and the measurement accuracy of ± 10 microns was confirmed.
Additionally, the CEM-530 was subjected to electrical safety testing in accordance with IEC 60601-1, electromagnetic compatibility (EMC) testing in accordance with IEC 60601-1-2, and optical radiation safety testing in accordance with ISO 15004-1 and ISO 15004-2.
# CLINICAL PERFORMANCE SUMMARY
A prospective clinical study was conducted to assess the agreement, accuracy and precision of the CEM-530 by comparing results across three machines/operators to those obtained with the predicate device, the Cellchek Plus. Three populations were studied: young (18-28 years of age) and adult (29-80 years of age) healthy subjects and pathologic adult eves (29-80 years of age).
A total of 74 eyes were evaluated (24 non-pathologic young eyes, 25 non-pathologic adult eves, and 25 pathologic adult eyes) for the assessment of device agreement and 62 evaluable eyes (20 non-pathologic young eyes, 22 non-pathologic adult eyes, and 20 pathologic adults eyes) for the assessment of device precision.
All evaluable study eyes (74 eyes) were included in the assessment of device agreement. The differences were on the order of 3-5% of the overall mean value for endothelial cell density, coefficient of variation of endothelial cell area, and central corneal thickness measurements and approximately 15% of the overall mean for % hexagonality. All of the 95% Limits of Agreement (LOAs) included 0 and the majority was well centered around 0. However, for % hexagonality, the measurements for the CEM-530 device were generally higher than those from the Cellchek Plus machine. The correlation coefficients were generally high for the endothelial cell density and central corneal thickness measurements, indicative of strong linear relationships; but they were low for coefficient of variation of endothelial cell area and % hexagonality.
The mean differences for endothelial cell density are illustrated on the Bland Altman plot (Figure i. The greatest absolute differences between the two machines were seen at the extremes of the measurement range (Figure 2). The Deming regression line (Figure 3) showed good agreement between the devices. Table I provides a summary of the agreement data for all subjects.
{3}------------------------------------------------
Endothelial Cell Density Figure 1: Bland-Altman Plot- Observed Data-Endothelial Cell Density- All Subjects, Effectiveness Population
Image /page/3/Figure/1 description: This image is a scatter plot with the title "Difference" on the y-axis and "Mean" on the x-axis. The x-axis ranges from 400 to 3400, while the y-axis ranges from -700 to 700. There are three horizontal lines across the plot at approximately y = -400, y = -50, and y = 250. The data points are clustered between x = 2200 and x = 2800.
Figure 2: Device Difference by Cellchek Plus Value- Endothelial Cell Density- All Subjects, Effectiveness Population
Image /page/3/Figure/3 description: The image is a scatter plot with the title "Device Difference" on the y-axis and "CELLCHEY EL Value" on the x-axis. The x-axis ranges from 500 to 3500, while the y-axis ranges from -700 to 700. The data points are scattered, showing a negative correlation between the two variables. As the CELLCHEY EL Value increases, the Device Difference tends to decrease.
{4}------------------------------------------------
Image /page/4/Figure/0 description: The image is a scatter plot with two trend lines. The y-axis is labeled "CEM-520 Value" and ranges from 400 to 3600. There are two trend lines on the plot, one labeled "Deming Regression Line" and the other labeled "45 Degree Line."
400
うこと
8 3 ວ
Figure 3: Deming Regression Plot- CEM-530 by Cellchek Plus- Endothelial Cell Density- All Subjects, Effectiveness Population
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------1こぐり !さむ とここは 16な 1695 ::この こちらのと 2600 3202 CELLCHECK XL Vslue
{5}------------------------------------------------
# Table 1: Four Corneal Specular Microscopic Variables Assessed with the Two Devices, All Configurations, All Subjects, Effectiveness Population
| | Endothelial Cell<br>Density | Coefficient of<br>Variation<br>Endothelial Cell<br>Area (CV) | Coefficient of<br>Variation<br>Endothelial Cell<br>Area<br>WITHOUT<br>Subject 001-3-<br>008 | %<br>Hexagonality | Central<br>Corneal<br>Thickness |
|-------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------|---------------------------------|
| Nidek CEM-530 | | | | | |
| N | 74 | 74 | 73 | 74 | 74 |
| Mean | 2482.6 | 29.9 | 29.4 | 69.0 | 551.5 |
| (SD) | (436.55) | (7.21) | (5.86) | (5.19) | (40.7) |
| Median | 2574.0 | 28.0 | 28.0 | 69.0 | 551.0 |
| Min-Max | 731 - 3093 | 19 - 66 | 19 - 52 | 56 - 82 | 411 - 640 |
| Deming Regression<br>Intercept (95%<br>Confidence Interval) | 452.8 | 3278.7 | -42.2 | 55.3 | -4.2 |
| | (193.1, 712.5) | (-120246.9,<br>126804.3) | (-90.2, 5.8) | (38.0, 72.5) | (-120.5,<br>112.2) |
| Deming Regression<br>Slope<br>(95% Confidence<br>Interval) | 0.8 | -104.3 | 2.3 | 0.2 | 1.0 |
| | (0.7, 0.9) | (-4072.4, 3863.8) | (0.7, 3.8) | (-0.1, 0.5) | (0.8, 1.2) |
| Konan CELLCHEK XL (PLUS) | | | | | |
| N | 74 | 74 | 73 | 74 | 74 |
| Mean (SD) | 2553.1 | 31.2 | 31.4 | 59.3 | 565.2 |
| | (544.85) | (4.63) | (4.00) | (7.80) | (41.32) |
| Median | 2649.5 | 31.0 | 31.0 | 59.5 | 565.0 |
| Min- Max | 515 - 3472 | 11 - 40 | 22 - 40 | 40 - 75 | 474 - 685 |
| Device Comparisons | | | | | |
| Mean Difference (SD) | -70.5 | -1.3 | -2.1 | 9.7 | -13.8 |
| | (167.89) | (8.60) | (5.52) | (8.44) | (19.63) |
| Mean Difference (SD)<br>as a % of the<br>CELLCHEK reading | -0.42% | 0.77% | -6.07% | 18.19% | -2.38% |
| | (15.416%) | (61.409%) | (17.73%) | (17.464%) | (3.558%) |
| 95% Limits of<br>Agreement (LOA) | (-406.3, 265.2) | (-18.5, 15.9) | (-13.1, 9.0) | (-7.2, 26.5) | (-53.0,<br>25.5) |
| Correlation (R2) | 0.9654 | -0.0088 | 0.4247 | 0.2036 | 0.8856 |
{6}------------------------------------------------
## Coefficient of Variation of Endothelial Cell Area
For the total population, the mean differences illustrated on the Bland Altman plot (Figure 4) were generally small. The flatness of the device difference plot (Figure 5) throughout the measurement range also illustrates good agreement between the devices, although an outlier is visible that had a low Cellchek Plus value and a very high Nidek CEM-530 value. This outlier caused a very poor fit on the Deming regression of Figure 6, but this greatly improved in Figure 7 when the regression lines were drawn with this subject excluded.
Image /page/6/Figure/2 description: This image is titled "Coefficient of Variation of Endothelial Cell Area". The image is labeled as "Figure 4: Bland-Altman Plot Observed Data- Coefficient of Variation Endothelial Cell Area- All Subjects, Effectiveness Population". The figure is likely a Bland-Altman plot, which is a scatter plot that is used to compare two methods of measurement.
Image /page/6/Figure/3 description: This image is a scatter plot with the x-axis labeled as "Mean" and the y-axis labeled as "Difference". The data points are scattered around the zero line, with some points above and some below. There are also two horizontal lines, one above and one below the zero line, which may represent the upper and lower limits of agreement.
{7}------------------------------------------------
Image /page/7/Figure/0 description: The image is a scatter plot titled "Endothelial Cell Area- All Subjects, Effectiveness Population". The y-axis is labeled "Device Difference" and ranges from -60 to 60. The x-axis is labeled "CELLCHEK XL Value" and ranges from 10 to 40. The data points are scattered across the plot, with a higher concentration between 25 and 35 on the x-axis and between -10 and 10 on the y-axis.
Figure 5: Device Difference by Cellchek Plus Value- Coefficient of Variation
Figure 6: Deming Regression Plot- CEM-530 by Cellchek Plus - Coefficient of Variation Endothelial Cell Area- All Subjects, Effectiveness Population, with Outlier ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Image /page/7/Figure/3 description: The image is a scatter plot with a regression line. The x-axis is labeled "CELLCHECK XL Value" and ranges from approximately 5 to 40. The y-axis is labeled "CEN-530 Value" and ranges from 0 to 100. The data points are scattered around the regression line, which has a positive slope.
{8}------------------------------------------------
# Figure 7: Deming Regression Plot- CEM-530 by Cellchek Plus - Coefficient of Variation Endothelial Cell Area- All Subjects, Effectiveness Population, without Outlier
Image /page/8/Figure/1 description: This image is a scatter plot with two trend lines. The y-axis is labeled "CEM-536 Value" and ranges from -10 to 70. The x-axis is labeled "CELLCHECK XL Value" and ranges from 20 to 50. One trend line is labeled "Deming Regression Line" and the other is labeled "45 Degree Line".
## Percent Hexagonality
While the LOAs included 0, the mean differences were on the order of approximately 15% of the mean for % hexagonality (Figure 8), more than for the other 3 variables. The lack of flatness of the device difference plot, Figure 9, also shows that the largest device differences are seen at the lower end of the scale. The Deming regression lines (Figure 10) show some agreement between the two devices.
{9}------------------------------------------------
Image /page/9/Figure/0 description: The image is a scatter plot titled "Effectiveness Population". The x-axis is labeled "Mean" and ranges from 52 to 80. The y-axis is labeled "Difference" and ranges from -40 to 40. There are three horizontal lines at approximately -15, 10, and 30, and the data points are scattered around the center of the plot.
Percent Hexagonality Figure 8: Bland-Altman Plot- Observed Data- % Hexagonality- All Subjects, Effectiveness Population
Figure 9: Device Difference by CELLCHEK XL (PLUS) Value- % Hexagonality- All Subjects, Effectiveness Population
Image /page/9/Figure/3 description: The image is a scatter plot with the title "Device Difference" on the y-axis and "CELLTHEK YL Value" on the x-axis. The x-axis ranges from 40 to 75, while the y-axis ranges from -40 to 40. The scatter plot shows a negative correlation between the two variables, with the points generally decreasing as the x-axis increases.
{10}------------------------------------------------
Image /page/10/Figure/0 description: This image is a scatter plot with two lines. The x-axis is labeled "CELLCHECK XL Value" and ranges from 40 to 80. The y-axis is labeled "CEM-530 Value" and ranges from 40 to 90. The scatter plot shows the relationship between the two variables, and the two lines represent the Deming Regression Line and the 45 Degree Line.
Figure 10: Deming Regression Plot- CEM-530 by CELLCHEK XL (PLUS)- % Hexagonality- All Subjects, Effectiveness Population
#### Central Corneal Thickness
The Bland Altman plot of Figure 11 shows that the LOAs include 0, indicating a lack of an overwhelmingly large systematic bias. The device differences plot (Figure 12) shows no notable effect of scale on agreement. The Deming regression lines (Figure 13) show an excellent fit.
{11}------------------------------------------------
Image /page/11/Figure/0 description: The image shows a Bland-Altman plot of observed data for central corneal thickness in an effectiveness population. The plot displays the difference between two measurements on the y-axis, ranging from approximately -80 to 120. There are three horizontal lines at approximately -50, -10, and 30, and data points are scattered around the middle line. The title of the plot is "Figure 11: Bland-Altman Plot- Observed Data- Central Corneal Thickness- All Subjects, Effectiveness Population".
Central Corneal Thickness Figure 11: Bland-Altman Plot- Observed Data- Central Corneal Thickness- All
Figure 12: Device Difference by Cellchek Plus Value- Central Corneal Thickness-All Subjects, Effectiveness Population
Ke Kr
550
らぐつ
न में नौ
E S J
રેટર રે
・・・・ - : : : : :
41 J
Image /page/11/Figure/3 description: This image shows a scatter plot titled "All Subjects, Effectiveness Population". The y-axis is labeled "Device Difference" and ranges from -120 to 100. The x-axis is labeled "CELLCHEK XL Value" and ranges from 400 to 700. The data points are scattered across the plot, with a higher density between x values of 500 and 600 and y values between -40 and 20.
{12}------------------------------------------------
Figure 13: Deming Regression Plot- CEM-530 by Cellchek Plus - Central Corneal Thickness - All Subjects, Effectiveness Population
Image /page/12/Figure/1 description: The image is a scatter plot that compares two different values. The y-axis is labeled "DEM-520 Value" and ranges from 450 to 700. The x-axis is labeled "CELICHECK AL Value" and ranges from 450 to 570. There are two dotted lines on the plot, one labeled "Ceming Regression Line" and the other labeled "45 Degree Line".
Agreement of the measurements with the CEM-530 and the predicate device was found to be acceptable. Overall, within eye/subject variability was acceptable, and similar for both machines.
The precision of the two devices was assessed with repeatability and reproducibility measures: the first within a given subject and the second within and among configurations. Table 2 shows the repeatability and reproducibility data for each of the 4 variables in all subjects. Repeatability was notably better for the CEM-530 device for central corneal thickness. The two devices had comparable repeatability for the other endpoints.
| Variable | Nidek CEM-<br>530<br>N=62 | Konan<br>CELLCHEK<br>PLUS<br>N=62 |
|-----------------------------------------------|---------------------------|-----------------------------------|
| Endothelial Cell Density | | |
| Repeatability SD | 75.5 | 62.4 |
| Repeatability SD as a % of the Mean | 3.0% | 2.4% |
| Repeatability Limit | 211.5 | 174.8 |
| Repeatability Ratio (CEM-530/CELLCHEK PLUS) | 1.2102 | |
| Reproducibility SD | 113.2 | 95.2 |
| Reproducibility SD as a % of the Mean | 4.5% | 3.7% |
| Reproducibility Limit | 317.0 | 266.7 |
| Reproducibility Ratio (CEM-530/CELLCHEK PLUS) | 1.1887 | |
Table 2: Precision Analyses- All Subjects Effectiveness Population
{13}------------------------------------------------
| Coefficient of Variation of Endothelial Cell Area (CV) | | |
|--------------------------------------------------------|--------|------|
| Repeatability SD | 2.3 | 2.7 |
| Repeatability SD as a % of the Mean | 8.1% | 8.5% |
| Repeatability Limit | 6.6 | 7.5 |
| Repeatability Ratio (CEM-530/CELLCHEK PLUS) | 0.8746 | |
| Reproducibility SD | 2.7 | 2.7 |
| Reproducibility SD as a % of the Mean | 9.3% | 8.6% |
| Reproducibility Limit | 7.6 | 7.6 |
| Reproducibility Ratio (CEM-530/CELLCHEK PLUS) | 1.0016 | |
| % Hexagonality | | |
| Repeatability SD | 4.1 | 5.4 |
| Repeatability SD as a % of the Mean | 6.0% | 8.8% |
| Repeatability Limit | 11.4 | 15.0 |
| Repeatability Ratio (CEM-530/CELLCHEK PLUS) | 0.7586 | |
| Reproducibility SD | 4.1 | 5.4 |
| Reproducibility SD as a % of the Mean | 6.0% | 8.9% |
| Reproducibility Limit | 11.4 | 15.2 |
| Reproducibility Ratio (CEM-530/CELLCHEK PLUS) | 0.7466 | |
| Central Corneal Thickness | | |
| Repeatability SD | 3.3 | 12.5 |
| Repeatability SD as a % of the Mean | 0.6% | 2.2% |
| Repeatability Limit | 9.2 | 34.9 |
| Repeatability Ratio (CEM-530/CELLCHEK XL (PLUS)) | 0.2634 | |
| Reproducibility SD | 5.8 | 13.2 |
| Reproducibility SD as a % of the Mean | 1.1% | 2.3% |
| Reproducibility Limit | 16.3 | 37.0 |
.
ﻴ
.
{14}------------------------------------------------
Additional analysis was completed on 24 images with and without corneal pathology using both the manual method and automated method of analysis on the same image. The images were then analyzed and generated the following results for CD (Cell Density), CV(Coefficient of Variation) and HEX(%Hexagonality)
| | CD<br>(Cell Density) | CV<br>(Coefficient of<br>Variation) | HEX<br>(Hexagonality) | NUM<br>(Number of Cells) |
|----------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------|-------------------------------------|------------------------------|--------------------------------|
| Mean | 2267.2 / 2165.3<br>Auto / Manual | 28.9 / 36.3<br>Auto / Manual | 68.7 / 57.4<br>Auto / Manual | 173.3 / 153.3<br>Auto / Manual |
| Mean Difference<br>(SD) | 101.9 (53.76) | -7.4(4.91) | 11.3(7.75) | |
| Mean difference<br>as a % of the<br>Manual reading | 4.94% | -19.41% | 20.98% | 13.47% |
| Correlation (R^2) | 0.9918 | 0.7523 | 0.2226 | 0.4306 |
| Deming Regression<br>Intercept | 127.7 | 5.0 | 50.3 | -334.1 |
| Deming Regression<br>Slope | 1.0 | 0.7 | 0.3 | 3.3 |
Table 3: Agreement Analysis on Same Image – Automated vs. Manual Method
Image /page/14/Figure/3 description: This image is labeled as "Figure 14: Deming Regression Plot - CEM-530 by Manual - Endothelial Cell Density (CD) - Same Image - All Subjects." The title indicates that the figure is a Deming Regression Plot. The plot is related to CEM-530 data obtained manually. The data is about endothelial cell density and includes all subjects from the same image.
Image /page/14/Figure/4 description: The image shows a scatter plot with two lines. The x-axis is labeled "Manual Value" and the y-axis is labeled "TEM-510 Value". There is a solid line labeled "Daring Regression Line" and a dashed line labeled "45 Degree Line". The scatter plot shows a positive correlation between the manual value and the TEM-510 value.
{15}------------------------------------------------
Figure 15: Deming Regression Plot - CEM-530 by Manual - Coefficient of Variation of Endothelial Cell Area (CV) – Same Image – All Subjects
Image /page/15/Figure/1 description: The image is a scatter plot with two lines. The x-axis is labeled "Input Value" and ranges from 20 to 55. The y-axis is labeled "Output Value" and ranges from 22 to 60. There is a solid line labeled "Dasing Regression Line" and a dashed line labeled "45 Degree Line."
Figure 16: Deming Regression Plot - CEM-530 by Manual - % Hexagonality (HEX). - Same Image - All Subjects
Image /page/15/Figure/3 description: The image is a scatter plot with two lines. The x-axis is labeled "Manual Value" and ranges from 10 to 80. The y-axis is labeled "CEM.430 Value" and ranges from 40 to 80. There are two lines on the plot, one solid and one dashed, and several data points scattered around the lines.
{16}------------------------------------------------
In summary, the agreement and precision of the Nidek CEM-530 was found to be substantially equivalent to the predicate device.
## CONCLUSIONS
The Nidek Specular Microscope CEM-530 has the same intended use and indications for use, technological characteristics, and principles of operation as the previously cleared predicate. The minor differences between the subject device and the predicate device have been assessed in a human clinical trial which found agreement, accuracy and precision between the two devices. Therefore, the Nidek Specular Microscope CEM-530 is as safe and effective as its predicate device, and thus, substantially equivalent.
{17}------------------------------------------------
Public Health Service
Food and Drug Administration 10903 New Hampshire Avenue Document Control Center - WO66-G609 Silver Spring, MD 20993-002
November 27, 2013
Nidek Co., Ltd. c/o Mr. Aron Shapiro Vice President 300 Brickstone Square Andover, MA 01810
Re: K130565
Trade/Device Name: Nidek Specular Microscope CEM-530 Regulation Number: 21 CFR 886.1850 Regulation Name: AC-Powered Slitlamp Biomicroscope Regulatory Class: Class II Product Code: NQE Dated: October 17, 2013 Received: October 18, 2013
Dear Mr. Shapiro:
We have reviewed your Section 510(k) premarket notification of intent to market the device we nave reviewed your boomed 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 commerce proc to may 20, 1977, Liv 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. Tournal controls provisions of the Act include requirements for annual registration, listing of I he general connous provisions and prohibitions against misbranding and ac vices, good manarataining prevates, as time, water 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), II your device is classified (500 above) a Existing major regulations affecting your device can be it may of Subject to adamonal conditions, Title 21, Parts 800 to 898. In addition, FDA may publish further announcements concerning your device in the Federal Register.
{18}------------------------------------------------
Page 2 - Mr. Aron Shapiro
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 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); good manufacturing practice requirements as set forth in the quality systems (QS) regulation (21 CFR Part 820); and if applicable, the electronic product radiation control provisions (Sections 531-542 of the Act); 21 CFR 1000-1050.
If you desire specific advice for your device on our labeling regulation (21 CFR Part 801), please go to http://www.fda.gov/AboutFDA/CentersOffices/CDRHOffices/ucm115809.htm for the Center for Devices and Radiological Health's (CDRH's) Office of Compliance. Also, please note the regulation entitled, "Misbranding by reference to premarket notification" (21CFR Part 807.97). For questions regarding the reporting of adverse events under the MDR regulation (21 CFR Part 803), please go to
http://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/Safety/ReportaProblem/default.htm for the CDRH's Office of Surveillance and Biometrics/Division of Postmarket Surveillance.
You may obtain other general information on your responsibilities under the Act from the Division of Small Manufacturers, International and Consumer Assistance at its toll-free number (800) 638-2041 or (301) 796-7100 or at its Internet address http://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/Resourcesfor You/Industry/default.htm.
Sincerely yours,
Image /page/18/Picture/6 description: The image contains the text "Deborah L Falls -S". The text is written in a bold, sans-serif font. The word "Deborah" is on the left, followed by "L Falls" and then "-S" on the right. The text is slightly distorted, with some parts appearing blurred or pixelated.
for Malvina B. Evdelman, M.D. Director Division of Ophthalmic and Ear, Nose and Throat Devices Office of Device Evaluation Center for Devices and Radiological Health
Enclosure
{19}------------------------------------------------
# Indications for Use
510(k) Number (if known):
Device Name:_ Nidek Specular Microscope CEM-530
Indications For Use:
The Nidek Specular Microscope CEM-530 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.
Prescription Use × (Part 21 CFR 801 Subpart D) AND/OR .
Over-The-Counter Use (21 CFR 807 Subpart C)
(Please Do NOT WRITE BELOW THIS LINE - CONTINUE ON ANOTHER PAGE IF NEEDED)
Concurrence of Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH)
Marsha L. Burke Nicholas -S 2013.12.03 15:14:38 -05'00'
Page 1 of __1_
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.