Remnant clinical samples were used to perform a method comparison study between the new device and the predicate device to demonstrate substantial equivalence.
Method comparison study using remnant de-identified samples
Clinical samples (native, spiked, and diluted); Sample Size: 100; Number of Sites: 1 (Internal Siemens R&D)
Dimension® RxL VANC assay (K963267)
Deming regression analysis (r=0.997)
Indications for Use
The Trinidad CH Vancomycin (Vanc) assay is for in vitro diagnostic use in the quantitative measurement of vancomycin in human serum or plasma on the Trinidad CH System. Vanc test results may be used in the diagnosis and treatment of vancomycin overdose and in monitoring levels of vancomycin to ensure appropriate therapy. The Trinidad CH Drug 3 Calibrator (DRUG3 CAL) is intended for in vitro diagnostic use in the calibration of Vancomycin (Vanc) on the Trinidad CH System.
Device Story
The Trinidad CH Vancomycin assay is an in vitro diagnostic test for human serum or plasma. It utilizes a homogeneous particle-enhanced turbidimetric inhibition immunoassay (PETINIA) technique. The device uses a synthetic particle-vancomycin conjugate and monoclonal vancomycin-specific antibody. Vancomycin in the patient sample competes with the particle-bound vancomycin for antibody binding, decreasing the rate of particle aggregation. The system measures the aggregation rate via bichromatic turbidimetric readings at 545 nm and 694 nm. The rate is inversely proportional to the vancomycin concentration. The assay is performed on the Trinidad CH System in a clinical laboratory setting by trained technicians. Results are provided to physicians to guide vancomycin dosing and monitor for potential overdose. The device includes a 5-level bovine serum-based calibrator (DRUG3 CAL) to ensure measurement accuracy.
Clinical Evidence
No clinical studies were performed. Evidence consists of analytical performance testing: precision (N=80 per sample), linearity (r=1.02), limit of detection/quantitation, and interference testing. Method comparison with the predicate device using 100 patient samples yielded a Passing Bablok regression of y = 1.04x - 1.04 (r=0.997).
Technological Characteristics
Turbidimetric immunoassay using mouse monoclonal antibody and synthetic particle-vancomycin conjugate. Bichromatic optical detection at 545 nm and 694 nm. Calibrators are bovine serum-based. System is a clinical chemistry analyzer. Performance validated per CLSI guidelines EP5-A3, EP6-A, EP17-A, EP7-A2, and EP9-A2.
Indications for Use
Indicated for quantitative measurement of vancomycin in human serum or plasma for patients requiring vancomycin monitoring or suspected of overdose. No specific age or gender contraindications provided.
Regulatory Classification
Identification
A vancomycin test system is a device intended to measure vancomycin, an antibiotic drug, in serum. Measurements obtained by this device are used in the diagnosis and treatment of vancomycin overdose and in monitoring the level of vancomycin to ensure appropriate therapy.
Predicate Devices
Vancomycin Flex Reagent Cartridge (k963267)
Dimension Drug Calibrator II (k033809)
Submission Summary (Full Text)
{0}
510(k) SUBSTANTIAL EQUIVALENCE DETERMINATION
DECISION MEMORANDUM
ASSAY ONLY TEMPLATE
A. 510(k) Number:
k160202
B. Purpose for Submission:
Addition of a turbidimetric Vancomycin assay to the Trinidad CH System instrument
C. Measurand:
Vancomycin
D. Type of Test:
Quantitative Immunoassay, turbidimetric
E. Applicant:
Siemens Healthcare Diagnostics Inc.
F. Proprietary and Established Names:
Trinidad CH Vancomycin (Vanc) Assay
Trinidad CH Drug 3 Calibrator (DRUG3 CAL)
G. Regulatory Information:
1. Regulation section:
21 CFR 862.3950; Vancomycin test system
21 CFR 862.3200; Clinical Toxicology Calibrator
2. Classification:
Class II
3. Product code:
LEH, DLJ
{1}
4. Panel:
Toxicology (91)
H. Intended Use:
1. Intended use(s):
See Indications for Use below
2. Indication(s) for use:
The Trinidad CH Vancomycin (Vanc) assay is for in vitro diagnostic use in the quantitative measurement of vancomycin in human serum or plasma on the Trinidad CH System. Vanc test results may be used in the diagnosis and treatment of vancomycin overdose and in monitoring levels of vancomycin to ensure appropriate therapy.
The Trinidad CH Drug 3 Calibrator (DRUG3 CAL) is intended for in vitro diagnostic use in the calibration of Vancomycin (Vanc) on the Trinidad CH System.
3. Special conditions for use statement(s):
For in vitro diagnostic use only
For professional use only
4. Special instrument requirements:
Trinidad CH System
I. Device Description:
The Trinidad CH Vancomycin (Vanc) assay is a turbidimetric assay previously cleared for use on the dimension clinical chemistry system in K963267. The Trinidad CH System instrument was previously cleared in k151767, but has not previously been cleared for use with any turbidimetric assays.
The Trinidad CH Vancomycin (Vanc) assay is a two reagent assay provided in reagent packs each contains two reagent wells. The contents of the reagent packs are the following:
- Vancomycin P1: Well 1, Particle Reagent 2.5 g/L; Well 2, Buffer 25.7 mM
- Vancomycin P2: Well 1: Antibody 0.034 g/L; Well 2, empty.
The Trinidad CH Drug 3 Calibrator is a five level product. The saleable device is packaged with 2 vials of each level in a box. The vials are amber borosilicate glass with
{2}
resealable polypropylene caps. The fill volume target is 5.1 mL.
Controls are not provided. The sponsor recommends the use of commercially available controls for the assay.
## J. Substantial Equivalence Information:
1. Predicate device name(s):
Dimension® VANC Flex® reagent Cartridge
Dimension Drug Calibrator II
2. Predicate 510(k) number(s):
k963267; k033809
3. Comparison with predicate:
| Item | Candidate Device
Trinidad CH Vancomycin
(VANC) | Predicate Device
Dimension® VANC
Flex®
reagent Cartridge
(k963267) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Similarities | | |
| Intended Use | For in vitro diagnostic use
in the quantitative measurement
of Vancomycin in human serum
or plasma. | Same |
| Methodology | Homogeneous particle enhanced
turbidimetric inhibition
immunoassay (PETINIA)
technique. | Same |
| Assay composition | Mouse monoclonal antibody,
Particle reagent,
buffer | Same |
| Specimen type | Serum and Lithium-Heparin
plasma | Same |
| Traceability | Traceable to USP reference
standards | Same |
| Differences | | |
| Measuring range | 3.0–50.0 μg/mL | 0.0 – 50.0 μg/mL |
| Instrumentation | Trinidad CH System | Cleared to be used on
dimension clinical
chemistry system |
| Calibrators | Trinidad CH Drug 3
Calibrator | Dimension Drug
Calibrator II |
{3}
| Item | Candidate Device Trinidad CH Drug 3 Calibrator (DRUG3 CAL) | Predicate Device Dimension Drug Calibrator II (k033809) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Similarities | | |
| Intended Use | For Vancomycin assay calibration | For calibration of multiple drug assays, including vancomycin |
| Calibrator Matrix: | Bovine Serum Base | Same |
| Levels | 5 | Same |
| Target Values | 1.0, 6.6, 12.5, 25.0, 52.5 μg/mL | Same |
| Differences | | |
| Drugs | Vancomycin only | Multi-drug calibrators including Vancomycin |
# K. Standard/Guidance Document Referenced (if applicable):
- CLSI EP5-A3: Evaluation of Precision Performance of Quantitative Measurement Methods; Approved Guideline- Third Edition
- CLSI EP6-A: Evaluation of the Linearity of Quantitative Measurement Procedures: A Statistical Approach; Approved Guideline.
- CLSI EP17-A: Protocol for Determination of Limits of Detection and Limits of Quantitation; Approved Guideline.
- CLSI EP7-A2: Interference Testing in Clinical Chemistry: Approved Guideline-Second Edition
- CLSI EP9-A2: Method Comparison and Bias Estimation Using Patient Samples: Approved Guideline- Second Edition
# L. Test Principle:
The Trinidad CH Vancomycin (Vanc) assay is based on a homogeneous particle enhanced turbidimetric inhibition immunoassay (PETINIA) technique which uses a synthetic particle-vancomycin conjugate (PR) and monoclonal vancomycin specific antibody (Ab). Vancomycin present in the sample competes with vancomycin on the particles for available antibody, thereby decreasing the rate of aggregation. Hence, the rate of aggregation is inversely proportional to the concentration of vancomycin in the sample. The rate of aggregation is measured using bichromatic turbidimetric readings at $545~\mathrm{nm}$ and $694~\mathrm{nm}$ .
# M. Performance Characteristics (if/when applicable):
# 1. Analytical performance:
# a. Precision/Reproducibility:
Precision (within-run precision) and intermediate precision (between-day precision) were assessed in accordance with CLSI Guideline EP5-A3 using
{4}
commercial quality control material (serum based), or pooled serum and plasma samples at five different Vancomycin levels. Samples were run in duplicate, twice per day, for 20 days, on a single analyzer using 1 lot of reagent.
| Sample | N | Mean (μg/mL) | Within-Run Precision | | Between-Day Precision | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | | SD (μg/mL) | CV(%) | SD (μg/mL) | CV(%) |
| Serum QC | 80 | 6.4 | 0.16 | 2.6 | 0.18 | 2.7 |
| Serum | 80 | 11.2 | 0.20 | 1.8 | 0.23 | 2.0 |
| Serum QC | 80 | 17.5 | 0.28 | 1.6 | 0.35 | 2.0 |
| Serum | 80 | 32.7 | 0.46 | 1.4 | 0.67 | 2.0 |
| Plasma | 80 | 45.8 | 0.78 | 1.7 | 0.83 | 1.8 |
b. Linearity/assay reportable range:
Linearity was evaluated with 10 samples which spanned the assay measuring interval (0.9, 3.0, 7.2, 13.5, 19.7, 26.0, 32.3, 38.6, 44.8, 51.1 μg/mL). Each was prepared by mixing high and low concentration samples across the measurement interval as described in CLSI EP06-A. The high sample was prepared by spiking native serum with purified Vancomycin Hydrochloride. The low sample was normal human serum with low level of Vancomycin. Six replicates were measured for each sample. The mean of these replicates was used for the regression analysis.
The result of the liner regression is: $y = 1.009x - 0.16545$ , $r = 1.02$
The results support the claimed measuring range of $3.0 - 50~\mu \mathrm{g / mL}$
c. Traceability, Stability, Expected values (controls, calibrators, or methods):
Traceability
The Trinidad CH Drug 3 Calibrator is traceable to USP Vancomycin.
Calibrator Stability
Protocols and acceptance criteria for the stability studies were reviewed and found acceptable. The real-time study results support open-vial/on board stability of 15 days at $2 - 8^{\circ}\mathrm{C}$ . Real time closed-vial stability studies are ongoing to support a shelf-life of 12 months or longer at $2 - 8^{\circ}\mathrm{C}$ .
Expected Values
Value assignment for Trinidad CH Drug 3 Calibrators will be conducted as for the predicate device cleared in K033809.
{5}
d. Detection limits:
Analytical sensitivities were determined following EP17-A2 using the nonparametric approach.
To determine LoB, 4 analyte-free samples (bovine serum base) were tested in replicate of 5 per run, with one run per day for 3 days, for a total of 60 measurements using each reagent lot (3 reagent lots were tested). The sponsor defined LoB as the concentration below which analyte-free samples could be found with a probability of 95%.
To determine LoD, 4 serum samples with low-analyte concentrations (0.1-0.3 µg/mL) were tested in replicate of 5 per run, with one run per day for 3 days, for a total of 60 measurements using each reagent lot (3 reagent lots were tested). The sponsor defined LoD as the lowest analyte concentration which could be detected, with a value above the LoB, with a probability of 95%.
To verify the claimed LoQ of 3.0 µg/mL, 4 serum samples with Vacomycine concentration of 2.5 µg/mL were tested using three reagent lots for three days, on one instrument for a total of 180 measurements. The acceptance criteria for LoQ were that the total error at the tested analyte concentration should be less than 20%.
The results are summarized in the table below and support the claimed LoB, LoD and LoQ.
| | LoB (µg/mL) | LoD (µg/mL) | LoQ (µg/mL) |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Lot 1 | 0.1 | 0.16 | 2.51 |
| Lot 2 | -0.1 | 0.17 | 2.37 |
| Lot 3 | 0.1 | 0.19 | 2.77 |
| Claimed | 0.1 | 0.2 | 3.0 |
e. Analytical specificity:
Interference
The sponsor tested the effects of common endogenous substances and therapeutic compounds using human serum pools at both low (10µg/mL) and high (40µg/mL) Vancomycin levels. The % difference between the test sample and the control sample was calculated. The sponsor defined no significant interference as within a ±10% difference relative to the control sample.
No interference was detected for hemolysis, icterus and lipemia at the following concentrations: Hemoglobin 600 mg/dL, Conjugated Bilirubin 20 mg/dL, Unconjugated Bilirubin 20 mg/dL, Lipemia (Intralipid) 1000 mg/dL.
No interference was detected from the following therapeutic and endogenous substances at the indicated concentrations:
{6}
| Substance | Highest Concentration at which no significant interference was detected | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Acetaminophen | 20 | mg/dL |
| Acetylsalicylic Acid | 50 | mg/dL |
| Amikacin | 100 | μg/mL |
| Amobarbital | 10 | mg/dL |
| Ampicillin | 5 | mg/dL |
| Ascorbic Acid | 3 | mg/dL |
| Caffeine | 10 | mg/dL |
| Carbamazepine | 12 | mg/dL |
| Cefazolin | 500 | μg/mL |
| Cefotaxime | 1000 | μg/mL |
| Chloramphenicol | 100 | μg/mL |
| Chlordiazepoxide | 2 | mg/dL |
| Chlorpromazine | 5 | mg/dL |
| Cimetidine | 10 | mg/dL |
| Clindamycin | 300 | μg/dL |
| Codeine | 10 | mg/dL |
| Creatinine | 30 | mg/dL |
| Dextran 40 | 6000 | mg/dL |
| Dextran 70 | 2500 | mg/dL |
| Diazepam | 4 | mg/dL |
| Digoxin | 5 | ng/dL |
| Erythromycin | 20 | mg/dL |
| Ethanol | 350 | mg/dL |
| Ethosuximide | 30 | mg/dL |
| Furosemide | 2 | mg/dL |
| Fusidic Acid | 500 | μg/mL |
| Gentamicin | 12 | mg/dL |
| Heparin (Porcine) | 8000 | U/L |
| Ibuprofen | 40 | mg/dL |
| Lidocaine | 6 | mg/dL |
| Lithium | 3.5 | mg/dL |
{7}
8
| Methicillin | 500 | μg/mL |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Netilmicin | 500 | μg/mL |
| Nicotine | 2 | mg/dL |
| Penicillin V | 80 | mg/dL |
| Pentobarbital | 10 | mg/dL |
| Phenobarbital | 15 | mg/dL |
| Phenytoin | 10 | mg/dL |
| Primidone | 10 | mg/dL |
| Propoxyphene | 0.4 | mg/dL |
| Protein-Albumin | 12 | g/dL |
| Protein-IgG | 5 | g/dL |
| Protein–Total | 12 | g/dL |
| Rheumatoid Factor | 1465 | U/mL |
| Rifampin | 50 | μg/mL |
| Salicylic Acid | 50 | mg/dL |
| Secobarbital | 5 | mg/dL |
| Sodium Fluoride | 1 | mg/dL |
| Sulfamethoxazole | 25 | μg/mL |
| Theophylline | 25 | mg/dL |
| Tobramycin | 100 | μg/mL |
| Trimethoprim | 25 | μg/mL |
| Urea | 500 | mg/dL |
| Uric Acid | 20 | mg/dL |
| Valproic Acid | 50 | mg/dL |
## Cross Reactivity
Vancomycin crystalline degradation product (CDP-1) was tested for cross-reactivity at 0 and 10 μg/mL of vancomycin following CLSI document EP07-A2. The results are summarized in the below table.
| Cross reactant | Test Concentration | Cross-reactivity | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | μg/mL | 0.0 μg/mL Vancomycin | 10 μg/mL Vancomycin |
| CDP-1 | 20 | 21.0% | 19.1% |
| CDP-1 | 15 | 20.8% | 18.9% |
| CDP-1 | 10 | 20.5% | 19.5% |
| CDP-1 | 5 | 22.0% | 19.0% |
{8}
In the labeling, the sponsor states:
A number of substances cause physiological changes in serum or plasma analyte concentrations. A comprehensive discussion of possible interfering substances, their serum or plasma concentrations, and their possible physiological involvements is beyond the scope of this document. Consult the listed reference for specific details on known potential interfering substances.⁶
As with any chemical reaction, you must be alert to the possible effect on results of unknown interferences from medications or endogenous substances. The laboratory and physician must evaluate all patient results in light of the total clinical status of the patient.
Vancomycin crystalline degradation product (CDP-1) at 20 µg/mL CDP-1 demonstrates cross-reactivity at 0 and 10 µg/mL Vanc of 21.0% and 19.1% respectively.
f. Assay cut-off:
Not applicable.
2. Comparison studies:
a. Method comparison with predicate device:
The sponsor tested 100 human serum samples (98 were native, 2 were altered) from patients taking Vancomycin, ranging in concentration from 4.4 to 48.1 µg/mL. The samples were tested in singlicate using the candidate and predicate device and analyzed using Passing Bablok regression which yielded the following regression equation: y = 1.04x -1.04, r = 0.997.
b. Matrix comparison:
A matrix comparison study between serum and Lithium-Heparin plasma was performed using 60 matched samples with Vancomycin concentrations from 4.0 to 43.3 µg/mL. The equation produced from linear regression analysis was:
y = 1.00x + 0.49, r = 0.990
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:
{9}
Not applicable.
5. Expected values/Reference range:
In the labeling, the sponsor states:
The therapeutic intervals are cited from the literature $^{1,2}$:
There is great disparity in vancomycin therapeutic intervals, especially with peak therapeutic intervals. Factors that might affect peak therapeutic ranges include dosage regimen and timing of sample collection.
Vancomycin levels in renal dialysis patients, burn patients and intravenous drug abusers should be closely monitored.
Peak Intervals: Samples from adult volunteers drawn two hours after the completion of a 60 minute infusion of vancomycin ranged from $18 - 26\ \mu\mathrm{g/mL}$. Samples drawn one hour after the completion of a 60 minute vancomycin infusion ranged from $25 - 40\ \mu\mathrm{g/mL}$. Samples drawn 30 minutes after the completion of a 60 minute infusion of vancomycin ranged from $30 - 40\ \mu\mathrm{g/mL}$.
Trough Intervals: Samples should be drawn just before the next dose. A trough interval of $5 - 10\ \mu\mathrm{g/mL}$ (3.5–6.9 $\mu\mathrm{mol/L}$) is generally considered to be effective; however, therapeutic levels should be established based on individual patient differences, clinical assessment, and bacterial susceptibility.
As with all in vitro diagnostic assays, each laboratory should determine its own reference intervals for the diagnostic evaluation of patient results. Consider these values as a guideline only.
1. Burtis CA, Ashwood ER, Bruns DE. Tietz Textbook of Clinical Chemistry and Molecular Biology, Fourth Edition, Elsevier Saunders, St. Louis, MO; pp. 1253 (clinical significance), pp. 2315 (reference values).
2. Finn AL, Taylor WJ. Individualizing Drug Therapy, Practical Applications of Drug Monitoring. New York: Gross, Townsend, Frank, Inc., 1981: 87-108.
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.