K153560 · The Binding Site Group , Ltd. · DCF · Aug 25, 2016 · Immunology
Device Facts
Record ID
K153560
Device Name
Optilite Low Level Albumin Kit
Applicant
The Binding Site Group , Ltd.
Product Code
DCF · Immunology
Decision Date
Aug 25, 2016
Decision
SESE
Submission Type
Traditional
Regulation
21 CFR 866.5040
Device Class
Class 2
Attributes
Real-World Evidence
Real-World Evidence
Submission
Device
Sponsor
RWD Sources
RWE Use Summary
Key Tags
K153560 · Aug 25, 2016
Optilite Low Level Albumin Kit
The Binding Site Group , Ltd.
Clinical patient samples (CSF, urine, serum); Published clinical literature
Clinical samples were used for method comparison against a predicate device to demonstrate substantial equivalence. Literature was used to establish the reference range for albumin in CSF.
The Optilite Low Level Albumin Kit is intended for the quantitative in vitro measurement of albumin in CSF, urine and serum using the Binding Site Optilite analyser to aid in the diagnosis of kidney and intestinal diseases. This test should be used in conjunction with other laboratory and clinical findings.
Device Story
Optilite Low Level Albumin Kit is an in vitro diagnostic reagent for quantitative immunoturbidimetric measurement of albumin in serum, urine, and CSF. Used on the Binding Site Optilite analyser; operated by laboratory personnel. Input: patient samples (serum, urine, CSF). Principle: reaction with sheep anti-human albumin antiserum forms insoluble complexes; light transmission through suspension is measured via photodiode. Output: albumin concentration calculated automatically by instrument via stored calibration curve. Results assist clinicians in diagnosing kidney and intestinal diseases alongside other clinical findings. Benefits include standardized, automated quantification of albumin levels for disease monitoring.
Clinical Evidence
Bench testing only. Precision studies (CLSI EP5-A2) showed total CV <8.5% for most matrices. Linearity (CLSI EP6-A) confirmed performance across reportable ranges. Interference testing (CLSI EP7-A2) demonstrated no significant interference from common endogenous substances or OTC drugs. Method comparison studies (n=166 CSF, 191 urine, 142 serum) against predicate showed high correlation (r >0.98). No clinical sensitivity/specificity studies performed.
Technological Characteristics
Immunoturbidimetric assay; sheep anti-human albumin antiserum; liquid stabilized reagents containing sodium azide, EACA, EDTA, and benzamidine preservatives. Analyzed on Binding Site Optilite analyzer using photodiode detection. Traceable to ERM-DA470k/IFCC. Open-vial stability 3 months; on-board stability 30 days.
Indications for Use
Indicated for quantitative in vitro measurement of albumin in serum, urine, and CSF to aid in the diagnosis of kidney and intestinal diseases. For prescription use only.
Regulatory Classification
Identification
An albumin immunological test system is a device that consists of the reagents used to measure by immunochemical techniques the albumin (a plasma protein) in serum and other body fluids. Measurement of albumin aids in the diagnosis of kidney and intestinal diseases.
Special Controls
*Classification.* Class II (special controls). The device is exempt from the premarket notification procedures in subpart E of part 807 of this chapter subject to § 866.9.
{0}
1
# 510(k) SUBSTANTIAL EQUIVALENCE DETERMINATION DECISION SUMMARY
A. 510(k) Number:
K153560
B. Purpose for Submission:
New Device
C. Measurand:
Albumin
D. Type of Test:
Quantitative Immunoturbidimetric
E. Applicant:
The Binding Site, Ltd.
F. Proprietary and Established Names:
Optilite® Low Level Albumin Kit
G. Regulatory Information:
1. Regulation section:
21 CFR 866.5040, Albumin immunological test system
2. Classification:
Class II
3. Product code:
DCF–Albumin antigen, antiserum, control
4. Panel:
Immunology (82)
{1}
H. Intended Use:
1. Intended use(s):
The Optilite Low Level Albumin Kit is intended for the quantitative in vitro measurement of albumin in CSF, urine and serum using the Binding Site Optilite analyser to aid in the diagnosis of kidney and intestinal diseases. This test should be used in conjunction with other laboratory and clinical findings.
2. Indication(s) for use:
See Intended use(s)
3. Special conditions for use statement(s):
For prescription use only
4. Special instrument requirements:
The Binding Site Optilite
I. Device Description:
The Optilite® Kit contains a polyclonal sheep anti-human albumin antiserum; a calibrator; two controls (low, high), an antigen excess reagent, and a reaction buffer. All are supplied in a stabilized liquid form.
The antiserum contains 0.099% sodium azide, 0.1% E-amino-n-caproic acid (EACA), 1mM ethylenediamine-tetraacetic acid (EDTA) and 0.01% benzamidine as preservatives. The calibrator and controls contain 0.099% sodium azide, 0.1% EACA and 0.01% benzamidine as preservatives, and the reaction buffer contains 0.099% sodium azide as a preservative.
J. Substantial Equivalence Information:
1. Predicate device name(s):
N Antiserum to Human Albumin
N Protein Standard SL
NT Protein Control SL
2. Predicate 510(k) number(s):
K972929
K964062
K964065
{2}
3. Comparison with predicate:
| Similarities | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Item | Device | Predicate |
| Indications for Use/ Intended Use | The Optilite Low Level Albumin Kit is intended for the quantitative in vitro measurement of albumin in CSF, urine and serum using the Binding Site Optilite analyser to aid in the diagnosis of kidney and intestinal diseases. This test should be used in conjunction with other laboratory and clinical findings. | In-vitro diagnostic reagent for the quantitative determination of albumin in human serum, heparinized and EDTA plasma, as well as in human urine and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) by means of immunonephelometry on the BN Systems. |
| Sample Matrix | Serum, urine, and CSF | Same (also heparinized and EDTA plasma) |
| Controls | Low, High | Low, High |
| Assay Traceability | ERM DA470k/IFCC | Same |
| Adult Reference Interval | Serum: 35,000–52,000 mg/L Urine: < 30 mg/L CSF: < 350 mg/L | Same |
| Differences | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Item | Device | Predicate |
| Test method | Turbidimetry | Nephelometry |
| Instrument | Binding Site Optilite | Siemens BNII |
| Detection antibody | Sheep anti-human albumin | Rabbit anti-human albumin |
| Open Vial Stability | 3 months | 4 weeks at 2–8°C |
| On-board stability | 30 days | 5 days at 8 hours/day for 5mL vials, 3 days at 8 hours/day for 2mL vials |
| Measuring range, Urine and CSF (Instrument Dilution) | 11–333 (1 + 0) 110–3,325 (1 + 9) | 2.2–68 (1/1) 11–340 (1/5) 44–1,360 (1/20) 220–6,800 (1/100) 440–27,200 (1/400) |
| Measuring range, Serum (Instrument Dilution) | 2,200–66,500 (1 + 199) | 350–5,500 (1/20) 6,900–110,000 (1/100) |
{3}
4
K. Standard/Guidance Document Referenced:
- CLSI C28-A3: "Defining, Establishing and Verifying Reference Intervals in the Clinical Laboratory"
- CLSI EP05-A2 Evaluation of Precision Performance of Quantitative Measurement Methods; Approved Guideline–Second Edition
- CLSI EP6-A: Evaluation of the Linearity of Quantitative Measurement Procedures: A Statistical Approach
- CLSI EP7-A2 Interference Testing in Clinical Chemistry, Approved Guideline–Second Edition
- CLSI EP17-A Protocols for Determination of Limits of Detection and Limits of Quantitation; Approved Guideline
L. Test Principle:
The determination of soluble antigen concentration by turbidimetric methods involves the reaction with specific antiserum to form insoluble complexes. When light is passed through the suspension formed a portion of the light is transmitted and focused onto a photodiode by an optical lens system. The amount of transmitted light is indirectly proportional to the specific protein concentration in the test sample. At the end of the reaction, the Antigen Excess Control is added to detect potential antigen excess. Concentrations are automatically calculated by reference to a calibration curve stored within the instrument.
M. Performance Characteristics (if/when applicable):
1. Analytical performance:
All manufacturer’s acceptance criteria were met for all studies.
a. Precision/Reproducibility:
The precision and reproducibility of the new assay was evaluated by studies based on CLSI EP05-A2, Evaluation of Precision Performance of Quantitative Measurement Methods; Approved Guideline–Second Edition; five sample preparations for each matrix were tested in duplicate in two runs per day over 21 days using three analyzers for a total of 84 replicates per sample. A summary of the results for each sample matrix is shown below:
Serum:
| LLAIb Sample | Mean mg/L | Within-Run | | Between-Run | | Between-Day | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | SD | %CV | SD | %CV | SD | %CV |
| 1 | 4,012.8 | 73.3 | 1.8 | 96.2 | 2.4 | 132.1 | 3.3 |
| 2 | 14,007.3 | 179.2 | 1.3 | 289.3 | 2.1 | 526.5 | 3.8 |
| 3 | 28,501.1 | 340.9 | 1.2 | 261.4 | 0.9 | 714.0 | 2.5 |
| 4 | 36,976.7 | 478.1 | 1.3 | 314.4 | 0.9 | 791.3 | 2.1 |
{4}
5
| LLAlb Sample | Mean mg/L | Within-Run | | Between-Run | | Between-Day | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | SD | %CV | SD | %CV | SD | %CV |
| 5 | 54,447.2 | 866.6 | 1.6 | 843.3 | 1.5 | 1357.9 | 2.5 |
| LLAlb Sample | Mean mg/L | Between-Instrument | | Between-Lot | | Total Precision | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | SD | %CV | SD | %CV | SD | %CV |
| 1 | 4,012.8 | 102.1 | 2.5 | -* | -* | 179.1 | 4.5 |
| 2 | 14,007.3 | 526.6 | 3.8 | -* | -* | 626.8 | 4.5 |
| 3 | 28,501.1 | 153.0 | 0.5 | 281.8 | 1.0 | 833.2 | 2.9 |
| 4 | 36,976.7 | 195.7 | 0.5 | 235.3 | 0.6 | 976.5 | 2.6 |
| 5 | 54,447.2 | 767.9 | 1.4 | 324.2 | 0.6 | 1818.3 | 3.3 |
* Samples 1 and 2 in the serum study used four instruments and one reagent lot. It is therefore not possible to calculate between-lot CV or SD.
Urine:
| LLAlb Sample | Mean mg/L | Within-Run | | Between-Run | | Between-Day | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | SD | %CV | SD | %CV | SD | %CV |
| 1 | 22.98 | 0.15 | 0.5 | 0.57 | 1.9 | 0.67 | 2.2 |
| 2 | 39.04 | 0.22 | 0.6 | 0.68 | 1.7 | 1.04 | 2.7 |
| 3 | 153.4 | 1.54 | 1.0 | 1.29 | 0.8 | 2.5 | 1.6 |
| 4 | 275.05 | 2.12 | 0.8 | 3.7 | 1.3 | 7.78 | 2.8 |
| 5 | 1,490.2 | 13.3 | 0.9 | 22.3 | 1.5 | 29.35 | 2.0 |
| LLAlb Sample | Mean mg/L | Between-Instrument | | Between-Lot | | Total Precision | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | SD | %CV | SD | %CV | SD | %CV |
| 1 | 22.98 | 0.29 | 1.2 | 0.22 | 0.97 | 0.89 | 3.0 |
| 2 | 39.04 | 0.19 | 0.5 | 0.1 | 0.26 | 1.26 | 3.2 |
| 3 | 153.4 | 0.48 | 0.3 | 1.34 | 0.87 | 3.21 | 2.1 |
| 4 | 275.05 | 3.39 | 1.2 | 3.32 | 1.21 | 8.87 | 3.2 |
| 5 | 1,490.2 | 12.53 | 0.8 | 14.02 | 0.94 | 39.2 | 2.6 |
CSF:
| LLAlb Sample | Mean mg/L | Within-Run | | Between-Run | | Between-Day | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | SD | %CV | SD | %CV | SD | %CV |
| 1 | 145.5 | 0.98 | 0.7 | 1.44 | 1.0 | 8.59 | 5.9 |
| 2 | 281.5 | 3.55 | 1.3 | 2.19 | 0.8 | 14.79 | 5.3 |
| 3 | 439.9 | 3.72 | 0.8 | 6.85 | 1.6 | 14.18 | 3.2 |
{5}
| LLAlb Sample | Mean mg/L | Within-Run | | Between-Run | | Between-Day | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | SD | %CV | SD | %CV | SD | %CV |
| 4 | 593.1 | 5.81 | 1.0 | 7.08 | 1.2 | 19.13 | 3.2 |
| 5 | 975.2 | 13.81 | 1.4 | 25.08 | 2.6 | 74.82 | 7.7 |
| LLAlb Sample | Mean mg/L | Between-Instrument | | Between-Lot | | Total Precision | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | SD | %CV | SD | %CV | SD | %CV |
| 1 | 145.5 | 1.13 | 0.8 | 1.67 | 1.15 | 8.77 | 6.0 |
| 2 | 281.5 | 4.48 | 1.6 | 8.15 | 2.9 | 15.37 | 5.5 |
| 3 | 439.9 | 10.14 | 2.3 | 5.96 | 1.36 | 16.18 | 3.7 |
| 4 | 593.1 | 7.75 | 1.3 | 11.15 | 1.88 | 21.21 | 3.6 |
| 5 | 975.2 | 13.76 | 1.4 | 18.2 | 1.87 | 80.11 | 8.2 |
b. Linearity/assay reportable range:
A linearity study evaluating the analytical measuring range of the standard sample dilution (1 + 0 for CSF and urine and 1 + 199 for serum) was performed following CLSI EP6-A, Evaluation of the Linearity of Quantitative Measurement Procedures: A Statistical Approach; Approved Guideline. A dilution series composed of proportional dilutions of a high pool with a low pool for each sample matrix was tested in three replicates.
The linearity of this assay using the serum matrix has been confirmed using a serially diluted serum sample over the range of 1,960–74,251 mg/L. The linear regression analysis was determined as $y = 1.00x + 9.17$.
The linearity of this assay using the urine matrix has been confirmed using a serially diluted urine sample over the range of 8.1–398 mg/L. The linear regression analysis was determined as $y = 1.00x + 0.12$.
The linearity of this assay using the CSF matrix has been confirmed using a serially diluted CSF sample over the range of 9.2–373 mg/L. The linear regression analysis was determined as $y = 1.00x + 0.22$.
c. Traceability, Stability, Expected values (controls, calibrators, or methods):
Traceability:
The master calibrator is prepared from pooled human sera and is used to control calibration between lots. The master calibrator is used to assign albumin values to assay calibrators and controls during production of each batch of kits; it is traceable to ERM-DA470k/IFCC.
Kit Stability:
Real-time stability—Studies to establish shelf-life stability (from the date of
{6}
manufacture when stored at recommended temperature 2–8°C) were previously performed on the 510(k)-cleared kit Human Albumin CSF Kit for use on SPAPLUS (K121045) demonstrating stability up to at least 18 months. This kit contains components manufactured using the same raw materials as the test device, with the exception of the high and low control materials, which are manufactured using a different buffer. Additional real time stability was therefore assessed using three manufacturing lots of control materials. Data supports an 18-month stability claim.
Open-vial stability–Testing established that the Optilite Low Level Albumin Kit Reagent, Calibrator and Controls can be stored, opened at 2–8°C for up to 3 months.
On-board stability–Testing established that the Optilite Low Level Albumin Kit Reagent can be stored on-board the Optilite Analyzer for 30 days at 8–12°C, provided that the power is left switched on as stated in the product insert.
d. Detection limit:
The detection limits of the assay were determined for all sample matrices. The evaluations were based on CLSI EP17-A, Protocols for Determination of Limits of Detection and Limits of Quantitation. Study results follow the explanation below:
Limit of Blank (LoB): The LoB is defined as the highest result expected in a sample that contains no analyte based on the 95th percentile distribution of blank results. The LoB serum sample was sample diluent, the LoB urine sample was normal donor urine, and the LoB CSF sample was a synthetic CSF fluid that mimics natural CSF without the presence of albumin. The LoB sample was tested 60 times and the mean and standard deviation (SD) were calculated.
Limit of Detection (LoD): The LoD is defined as the lowest amount of analyte in a sample that can be reliably detected. The LoD was calculated from the LoB and the combined SDs of the five LoQ samples: $\mathrm{LoD} = \mathrm{LoB} + [(1.645 \times \mathrm{SDs})]$.
Limit of Quantitation (LoQ): The LoQ study was performed by analyzing five different samples with a concentration within ±10% of the lowest calibrator value used at the standard dilution. These samples were tested over five days with one batch of reagent to give 60 replicate results. This data demonstrated that the total error (TE) is < 10% at the bottom of the reference range. Samples were diluted with sample diluent so that the concentrations were close to the bottom of the measuring range at the standard sample dilution (2200 mg/L). Urine samples were spiked with purified human albumin powder so that the concentrations were close to the bottom of the measuring range at the standard sample dilution (11 mg/L). CSF samples were diluted with synthetic CSF so that the concentrations were close to the bottom of the measuring range at the standard sample dilution (11 mg/L).
The claimed analytical sensitivity for each kit is summarized below:
7
{7}
| Matrix | LoB | LoD | LoQ |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Serum | 0 mg/L | 67.46 mg/L | 2200 mg/L |
| Urine | 1.45 mg/L | 1.91 mg/L | 11 mg/L |
| CSF | 0.08 mg/L | 0.47 mg/L | 11 mg/L |
# e. Analytical specificity:
A study was performed following CLSI EP07-A2, Interference Testing in Clinical Chemistry, Approved Guideline. Samples were prepared for each interferent test from two sample pools. Minimal assay interference effects were observed when tested with the following substances:
# CSF:
Two samples for each interferent, one within the normal range and well below the medical decision point (116.5–159.5 mg/L) and one with a concentration within 25% of the medical decision point (361.4–371.3 mg/L) were tested.
| Substance | Concentration | Substance | Concentration |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Bilirubin | 200 mg/L | Acetaminophen | 1324 μmol/L |
| Hemoglobin | 5 g/L | Acetylsalicylic acid | 3.63 mmol/L |
# Urine:
Two samples for each interferent, one with a concentration within $25\%$ of the medical decision point $(24.4 - 36.4\mathrm{mg / L})$ and sample with a concentration above the reference range $(50.8 - 230.3\mathrm{mg / L}$ or $495.8.0\mathrm{mg / L})$ were tested.
| Substance | Concentration | Substance | Concentration |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Ascorbic Acid | 200 mg/L | Hemoglobin | 250 mg/L |
| Acetaminophen | 1324 μmol/L | Ibuprofen | 2425 μmol/L |
| Furosemide | 90 μmol/L | Glybenclamide (glyburide) | 3.9 μmol/L |
| Trichloromethiazide | 50 mg/mL | Metformin HCl | 8 mg/L |
| Enalapril maleate | 496.7 ng/mL | Losartan | 2932 ng/mL |
| Simvastatin | 12.9 ng/mL | Acetone | 7000 mg/L |
| Acetylsalicylic Acid | 1500 mg/L | Calcium chloride | 780 mg/L |
| Creatinine | 6000 mg/L | Glucose | 30,000 mg/L |
| Magnesium chloride | 8000 mg/L | Sodium citrate | 1000 mg/L |
| Sodium oxalate | 600 mg/L | Urea | 25,000 mg/L |
| Uric acid | 200 mg/L | Urobilinogen | 45 mg/L |
# Serum:
Two samples for each interferent, one with a concentration within $25\%$ of the medical decision point $(35,000~\mathrm{mg / L})$ and the other within the reference range were tested
{8}
(45,096-51,187 mg/L).
| Substance | Concentration | Substance | Concentration |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Bilirubin | 200 mg/L | Acetylsalicylic acid | 3.6 mmol/L |
| Hemoglobin | 5 g/L | Intralipid | 2000 mg/dL |
| Acetaminophen | 1324 μmol/L | Triglycerides | 1000 mg/dL |
Metronidazole absorbs light at 340nm, the same wavelength used as the assay, thus interfering with the assay. The labelling insert includes a caution that this assay is not suitable for use with patients taking metronidazole.
Antigen Excess: No antigen excess was observed up to a level of 202 times the top of the calibration curve at the standard 1+0 sample dilution. This is equivalent to 67,384 mg/L.
f. Assay cut-off:
Not applicable
2. Comparison studies:
a. Method comparison with predicate device:
For each sample matrix, the results obtained by the Low Level Albumin Kit assay were compared with the results obtained by the predicate assay. Care was taken to include samples that had admission diagnoses relevant to the Intended Use of the assay (e.g., samples from patients with kidney disease were included in the urine matrix study and samples from patients with central nervous system disorders were included in the CSF matrix study) although many of the final diagnoses were not known. Less than 10% of the samples in any of the matrices were contived to cover the measuring range. Only samples within both assays' measuring range were included in the analysis of the results:
| Matrix | N | Passing-Bablok Analysis | 95^{th} CI Slope | 95^{th} CI Intercept | Pearsons r value | Sample Range |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Serum | 142 | y = 1.01x + 932.8 | 0.97 – 1.05 | -391– 2,305 | 0.996 | 2460– 61,000 |
| Urine | 122 | y = 1.06x-0.44 | 1.04– 1.07 | -1.28– 0.31 | 0.994 | 12.1–3,225 |
| CSF | 164 | y = 1.00x + 11.76 | 0.97– 1.03 | 6.16– 16.83 | 0.988 | 34.2–3,301 |
b. Matrix comparison:
Not applicable
3. Clinical studies:
{9}
a. Clinical Sensitivity and Specificity:
Not applicable
b. Other clinical supportive data (when a. is not applicable):
Not applicable
4. Clinical cut-off:
Not applicable
5. Expected values/Reference range:
The predicate reference ranges for albumin in serum and urine were tested and verified in accordance with CLSI C28-A3, Defining, Establishing and Verifying Reference Intervals in the Clinical Laboratory using samples from 50 apparently healthy subjects for each analyte. The reference range for albumin in CSF is taken a published literature reference range for albumin in $\mathrm{CSF}^1$ .
| Normal adult albumin | Range |
| --- | --- |
| Serum | 35,000–52,000 mg/L |
| Urine | < 30 mg/L |
| CSF | < 350 mg/L |
# N. Proposed Labeling:
The labeling is sufficient and it satisfies the requirements of 21 CFR Part 809.10.
# O. Conclusion:
The submitted information in this premarket notification is complete and supports a substantial equivalence decision.
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.