K161952 · Syneron Medical, Ltd. · OHV · Nov 7, 2016 · General, Plastic Surgery
Device Facts
Record ID
K161952
Device Name
UltraShape System
Applicant
Syneron Medical, Ltd.
Product Code
OHV · General, Plastic Surgery
Decision Date
Nov 7, 2016
Decision
SESE
Submission Type
Traditional
Regulation
21 CFR 878.4590
Device Class
Class 2
Attributes
Therapeutic
Indications for Use
The UltraShape System delivers focused ultrasound energy that can disrupt subcutaneous adipose tissue (SAT) for lipolysis (breakdown of fat) to provide a non-invasive approach to achieve a desired aesthetic effect. It is intended for non-invasive reduction in abdominal circumference and for use on the flanks.
Device Story
UltraShape System uses focused ultrasound energy to disrupt subcutaneous adipose tissue (SAT) for non-invasive lipolysis. System comprises a control unit and two ultrasonic transducers; transducers convert electrical signals into mechanical (acoustical) energy. Device targets adipose tissue selectively without damaging neighboring blood vessels, nerves, or muscle. Operates in two modes: Single Focus Deep Mode and Super Mode. Used in clinical settings by trained operators for aesthetic body contouring. Provides real-time optical and acoustic feedback via tracking and guidance system. Healthcare providers use device to reduce abdominal and flank circumference; patient benefits include non-invasive fat reduction with minimal discomfort and no significant adverse events.
Clinical Evidence
Prospective, single-arm, self-controlled, multicenter study (n=48). Primary endpoint: blinded review of pre/post-treatment photographs and treated/control flanks. 80% (36/45) of subjects met primary endpoint. Secondary endpoints: ultrasound and caliper measurements showed statistically significant fat thickness reduction on treated flanks vs. control. No adverse events reported; mild erythema/edema resolved within days. Bench testing included biocompatibility (ISO 10993), beam profile, acoustic power, and electrical safety (IEC 60601-1).
Technological Characteristics
Focused ultrasound stimulator; piezoelectric ceramic element transducers. System includes console, computer, and transducers. Parameters: frequency, burst duration, and power intensity consistent with predicate. Connectivity includes real-time optical/acoustic feedback. Electrical safety per IEC 60601-1; EMC per IEC 60601-1-2. Biocompatibility per ISO 10993.
Indications for Use
Indicated for non-invasive reduction of abdominal circumference and flank fat in patients with subcutaneous adipose tissue of at least 1.5 cm and BMI between 22 and 30.
Regulatory Classification
Identification
A Focused Ultrasound Stimulator System for Aesthetic Use is a device using focused ultrasound to produce localized, mechanical motion within tissues and cells for the purpose of producing either localized heating for tissue coagulation or for mechanical cellular membrane disruption intended for noninvasive aesthetic use.
Special Controls
*Classification.* Class II (special controls). The special control for this device is FDA's “Class II Special Controls Guidance Document: Focused Ultrasound Stimulator System for Aesthetic Use.” See § 878.1(e) for the availability of this guidance document.
{0}------------------------------------------------
Image /page/0/Picture/1 description: The image shows the logo for the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services. The logo features a stylized image of three human profiles facing right, stacked on top of each other. The profiles are black and have a flowing, abstract design. The text "DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES - USA" is arranged in a circular pattern around the image.
Food and Drug Administration 10903 New Hampshire Avenue Document Control Center - WO66-G609 Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002
November 7, 2016
Syneron Medical Ltd. % Ms. Janice Hogan Hogan Lovells US LLP 1835 Market Street, 29th Floor Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103
Re: K161952
Trade/Device Name: UltraShape System Regulation Number: 21 CFR 878.4590 Regulation Name: Focused Ultrasound Stimulator System for Aesthetic Use Regulatory Class: Class II Product Code: OHV Dated: October 3, 2016 Received: October 3, 2016
Dear Ms. Hogan:
We have reviewed your Section 510(k) premarket notification of intent to market the device referenced above and have determined the device is substantially equivalent (for the indications for use stated in the enclosure) to legally marketed predicate devices marketed in interstate commerce prior to May 28, 1976, the enactment date of the Medical Device Amendments, or to devices that have been reclassified in accordance with the provisions of the Federal Food. Drug. and Cosmetic Act (Act) that do not require approval of a premarket approval application (PMA). You may, therefore, market the device, subject to the general controls provisions of the Act. The general controls provisions of the Act include requirements for annual registration, listing of devices, good manufacturing practice, labeling, and prohibitions against misbranding and adulteration. Please note: CDRH does not evaluate information related to contract liability warranties. We remind you, however, that device labeling must be truthful and not misleading.
If your device is classified (see above) into either class II (Special Controls) or class III (PMA), it may be subject to additional controls. Existing major regulations affecting your device can be found in the Code of Federal Regulations, Title 21, Parts 800 to 898. In addition, FDA may publish further announcements concerning your device in the Federal Register.
Please be advised that FDA's issuance of a substantial equivalence determination does not mean that FDA has made a determination that your device complies with other requirements of the Act or any Federal statutes and regulations administered by other Federal agencies. You must comply with all the Act's requirements, including, but not limited to: registration and listing (21 CFR Part 807); labeling (21 CFR Part 801); medical device reporting of medical devicerelated 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.
{1}------------------------------------------------
If you desire specific advice for your device on our labeling regulation (21 CFR Part 801), please contact the Division of Industry and Consumer Education at its toll-free number (800) 638-2041 or (301) 796-7100 or at its Internet address
http://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/ResourcesforYou/Industry/default.htm. Also, please note the regulation entitled, "Misbranding by reference to premarket notification" (21 CFR Part 807.97). For questions regarding the reporting of adverse events under the MDR regulation (21 CFR Part 803), please go to
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 Industry and Consumer Education at its toll-free number (800) 638-2041 or (301) 796-7100 or at its Internet address
http://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/ResourcesforYou/Industry/default.htm.
Sincerely,
# Jennifer R. Stevenson -A
For Binita S. Ashar, M.D., M.B.A., F.A.C.S. Director Division of Surgical Devices Office of Device Evaluation Center for Devices and Radiological Health
Enclosure
{2}------------------------------------------------
# DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration
# Indications for Use
510(k) Number (if known)
K161952
Device Name
UltraShape System
Indications for Use (Describe)
The UltraShape System delivers focused ultrasound energy that can disrupt subcutaneous adipose tissue (SAT) for lipolysis (breakdown of fat) to provide a non-invasive approach to achieve a desired aesthetic effect. It is intended for non-invasive reduction in abdominal circumference and for use on the flanks.
Type of Use (Select one or both, as applicable)
区 Prescription Use (Part 21 CFR 801 Subpart D)
□ Over-The-Counter Use (21 CFR 801 Subpart C)
Form Approved: OMB No. 0910-0120
Expiration Date: January 31, 2017
See PRA Statement on last page
# PLEASE DO NOT WRITE BELOW THIS LINE - CONTINUE ON A SEPARATE PAGE IF NEEDED.
This section applies only to requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.
#### *DO NOT SEND YOUR COMPLETED FORM TO THE PRA STAFF EMAIL ADDRESS BELOW.*
The burden time for this collection of information is estimated to average 79 hours per response, including the time to review instructions, search existing data sources, gather and maintain the data needed and complete and review the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this information collection, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to:
> Department of Health and Human Services Food and Druq Administration Office of Chief Information Officer Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) Staff PRAStaff(@fda.hhs.gov
"An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB number."
{3}------------------------------------------------
#### 510(k) SUMMARY
#### Syneron Medical Ltd.'s UltraShape System
- Submitted by: Syneron Medical Ltd. P.O.B. 550 Industrial Zone Tavor Building Yokneam Illit, 20692 Israel Contact Person: Ruthie Amir, MD, Global Vice President of Clinical, Regulatory and Education Syneron Medical Ltd. P.O.B. 550 Industrial Zone Tavor Building Yokneam Illit, 20692 Israel Phone: 972-73-244-2200 Facsimile: 972-73-244-2202
#### Submission Correspondent:
Janice Hogan Hogan Lovells US LLP 1835 Market Street, 29th Floor Philadelphia, PA 19103 Phone: 267 675 4600 Facsimile: 267 675 4601
Date Prepared: November 3, 2016
#### Name of Device
Syneron UltraShape System
#### Common or Usual Name
Focused Ultrasound Stimulator System for Aesthetic Use
#### Classification
Focused Ultrasound Stimulator System for Aesthetic Use
21 CFR 878.4590, Class II, product code OHV
#### Predicate Device
Syneron UltraShape (K141708)
#### Intended Use / Indications for Use
The UltraShape System delivers focused ultrasound energy that can disrupt subcutaneous adipose tissue (SAT) for lipolysis (breakdown of fat) to provide a non-invasive approach to achieve a desired aesthetic effect. It is intended for non-invasive reduction in abdominal circumference and for use on the flanks.
{4}------------------------------------------------
## Device Description
The UltraShape System is comprised of multiple components, including the control unit and two ultrasonic transducers. The UltraShape System selectively targets subcutaneous adipose tissue via focused ultrasound for the purpose of non-invasive aesthetic body contouring. The transducers are electro-mechanical devices that convert an electrical signal into mechanical (acoustical) energy. The operating parameters of the UltraShape System achieve selective disruption of adipose tissue without damaging neighboring tissues such as blood vessels, nerves, or muscle. The UltraShape System has two treatment modes available, the Single Focus Deep Mode and the Super Mode.
## Technological Characteristics
The UltraShape System has very similar technological characteristics compared to its predicate. The UltraShape and the predicate are both comprised of the system console, including the computer, and two ultrasonic transducers deliver the focused ultrasound energy beam to the targeted treatment area, and real-time optical and acoustic feedback (optional) on the treatment is provided via the tracking and guidance system. With both the UltraShape and its predicate, the transducers' functionality is based on the piezoelectric effect implemented with the ceramic element.
In addition, the UltraShape System has the same treatment parameters as the previously cleared UltraShape device, including the same frequency, burst duration, and user interface. In addition, the power intensity levels were previously cleared for the UltraShape. The focal distribution of the energy beams delivered to the treatment area is consistent between the UltraShape and its predicate, including the focal depth, diameter, and length. Software changes were also made to the updated version of the UltraShape. Notably, the UltraShape System has been evaluated in clinical, in vivo, and bench testing, and none of the changes raise new types of safety or effectiveness questions compared to the predicate.
Therefore, the UltraShape System has similar technological characteristics compared to its predicate.
#### Performance Data
Nonclinical Performance Testing. The following nonclinical performance testing was previously conducted to support the substantial equivalence of the UltraShape System to the predicate device, consistent with FDA's "Class II Special Controls Guidance Document: Focused Ultrasound Stimulator System for Aesthetic Use" (2011). In all instances, the UltraShape System functioned as intended.
- . Biocompatibility testing in accordance with ISO 10993 for skin irritation, sensitization, cytotoxicity testing supported the biocompatibility of the patient-contacting components of the device.
- Beam profile testing demonstrated that the acoustic energy is delivered and concentrated in the desired target location.
{5}------------------------------------------------
- . Acoustic power testing demonstrated that the acoustic power of the transducers is highly predictable with low variability.
- . In vitro acoustic and thermal measurements demonstrated the safety of non-targeted tissues both proximal and distal to the targeted region.
- . Software verification and validation was performed, and demonstrated that the software performs as intended.
- . Electrical safety (IEC 60601-1), electromagnetic compatibility (IEC 60601-1-2) and electromagnetic immunity testing was conducted and results were passing.
- In vivo testing in an animal model was performed which demonstrated the treatment effects of the UltraShape, and supported its safety and efficacy profile for the intended use.
Clinical Data: In addition, clinical evaluation of the intended population was performed in several separate prospective studies, including a single-arm, prospective, selfcontrolled study to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of the UltraShape device for noninvasive lipolysis of the flanks. A total of 48 subjects were enrolled and treated in the study (of which 46 subjects completed the study) at 3 U.S. sites. The study included females (83%) and males (17%) across a range of ages, races, ethnicities, and skin types. The mean age was 45 years and the majority of the subjects were Caucasian. The baseline mean weight was 68±9 kg and mean BMI was 25.28±2.08 kg/m².
Each subject received 3 biweekly treatments on one randomized flank, while the other flank remained un-treated throughout the study. Subject follow up was conducted at 4 weeks, 8 weeks, and 16 weeks after the last treatment. The study included visual assessment of the flanks by 2 blinded reviewers as well as fat thickness measurements of the post treatment flanks compared to baseline measurements.
Study results demonstrated that the UltraShape treatment at the flanks was accompanied with no or minimal discomfort, consistent with results observed for the prior UltraShape clearances. Throughout the study, no adverse events were reported, and the anticipated immediate responses after treatment (e.g., mild erythema, mild edema) were consistent with those observed with other similar devices, such as the previously cleared UltraShape systems (K133238, K160896) and Cynosure's SculpSure (K150230). The responses were mild and resolved completely within days without any intervention.
The primary endpoint was met, where 80% of treated versus control flanks and pre versus post treatment photographs were correctly identified by blinded reviewers. One subject was not included in the primary endpoint blinded review assessment because of the poor quality of the post-treatment photograph for this subject. Although results for this subject showed fat reduction at the treated flank by caliper (-1.0 mm ( 2.38%)) and by ultrasound (-0.55 mm (-2.40%)), if this subject was imputed as a failure in a sensitivity analysis of the primary endpoint, the study success rate would be 78%, which would not meet the primary endpoint threshold of 80%.
In addition, secondary effectiveness endpoints demonstrated that fat thickness reduction on the treated flank was statistically significantly greater compared to the control flank at each
{6}------------------------------------------------
follow up visit as measured by ultrasound. Fat thickness reduction results following UltraShape treatment were greater compared to controls as measured by caliper (reaching statistical significance in absolute fat thickness reduction at 16 week follow up). At 4 week follow up, investigator satisfaction measured 70%, and subsequent results reflected lower satisfaction with increasing time from treatment (53% at 8 weeks follow up, 43% at 16 weeks follow up). In terms of subject satisfaction, at 4, 8 and 16 weeks following end of treatments, 43%, 47%, and 41% subjects were satisfied or very satisfied. The study design and results are further summarized in the table below.
| Study Design | Prospective, single-arm, self-controlled, multicenter clinical study |
|--------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Sample size | 48 subjects at 3 sites were enrolled and treated in the study |
| Principal<br>Eligibility<br>Criteria | Fat thickness of at least 1.5 cm in the treated area as measured by calibrated caliper. BMI interval: $22 \le BMI \le 30$ (normal to overweight, but not obese). General good health confirmed by medical history and skin examination of the treated area. |
| Follow up<br>intervals | 3 treatment visits and follow up visits at 4 weeks, 8 weeks, and 16 weeks. |
| Endpoints | <b>Primary:</b> Fat reduction in flanks was evaluated by visual assessment of randomized photographs of before (baseline) versus after (16 weeks following last treatment), as well as treated versus control flanks, by 2 blinded reviewers. The primary endpoint was achieved when at least 80% of treated versus control flanks and pre- versus post-treatment photographs were correctly identified.<br><br><b>Secondary:</b> Fat thickness reduction on the treated flank compared to the control flank, measured by ultrasound. Fat thickness reduction on the treated flank compared to the control flank, measured by caliper. Investigator satisfaction assessment. Subject satisfaction self-assessment. Subjects' comfort level assessed immediately after each treatment. |
| Effectiveness<br>Results | <b>Primary:</b> Met endpoint; blinded reviewers identified correctly (by agreement between the blinded reviewers) both the pre-/post-treatment photographs as well as the treated/un-treated flanks in 80% (36 of 45) subjects.<br><br><b>Secondary:</b> Fat thickness reduction results following UltraShape treatment were statistically significantly greater compared to controls as measured by ultrasound. Fat thickness reduction results following UltraShape treatment were greater compared to controls as measured by caliper (reaching statistical significance in absolute fat thickness reduction at 16 week follow up). Investigators were satisfied with results following UltraShape treatment for 70% of the subjects at 4 week follow up, 53% of the subjects at 8 week follow up, and 43% of the subjects at 16 week follow up. At 4, 8 and 16 weeks following end of treatments, 43%, 47%, and 41% of the subjects were satisfied or very satisfied. Subjects reported no to minimal pain for each of the three treatments. |
| Safety<br>Results | No adverse events were reported after 141 treatment sessions were conducted. The only immediate responses recorded were mild and resolved completely |
| | within days without any intervention. |
{7}------------------------------------------------
Therefore, clinical evaluation of the UltraShape device demonstrated the favorable performance and safety profile of the device for lipolysis of the flanks. Results thus further support substantial equivalence of the device compared to the predicate.
## Substantial Equivalence
The UltraShape has the same intended use and similar indications for use, technological characteristics and principles of operation as its predicate device. The technological differences between the UltraShape and its predicate mainly consist of minor improvements to the device to facilitate use. Nonclinical and clinical studies of the UltraShape have demonstrated the safety and effectiveness profile of the UltraShape in the intended population. Thus, the UltraShape is substantially equivalent to the predicate device.
# Conclusion
Syneron's UltraShape System is a Focused Ultrasound Stimulator System for Aesthetic Use Class II device that has been evaluated in nonclinical testing in accordance with FDA's Special Controls Guidance Document. Testing demonstrated that the device performs as intended. The UltraShape device is substantially equivalent to its predicate device (K141708).
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.