K163271 · Abbott Point of Care, Inc. · CGA · Apr 10, 2017 · Clinical Chemistry
Device Facts
Record ID
K163271
Device Name
i-Stat Alinity System with i-Stat Glucose test
Applicant
Abbott Point of Care, Inc.
Product Code
CGA · Clinical Chemistry
Decision Date
Apr 10, 2017
Decision
SESE
Submission Type
Traditional
Regulation
21 CFR 862.1345
Device Class
Class 2
Attributes
Pediatric
Indications for Use
The i-STAT Alinity System with i-STAT Glucose test is intended for use in point of care or clinical laboratory settings. The i-STAT Alinity System with Glucose test is intended for the quantitative measurement of glucose in arterial and venous whole blood. Glucose measurements are used in the diagnosis, monitoring, and treatment of carbohydrate metabolism disorders including, but not limited to, diabetes mellitus, idiopathic hypoglycemia, and pancreatic islet cell carcinoma. The i-STAT Glucose test with the i-STAT Alinity System has not been evaluated in neonates. For in vitro diagnostic use.
Device Story
Point-of-care or clinical laboratory system; uses disposable test cartridges containing glucose oxidase sensors. Operator applies 2-3 drops of arterial or venous whole blood to cartridge; instrument moves fluid across sensors. Amperometric measurement principle: glucose oxidation by glucose oxidase produces hydrogen peroxide; oxidation of H2O2 at electrode generates current proportional to glucose concentration. System performs automated quality checks on motor, electrical, pressure, and temperature systems before generating result. Provides quantitative glucose result in ~2 minutes. Used by clinicians for rapid metabolic assessment; aids in diagnosis and management of carbohydrate metabolism disorders. Requires prescription.
Clinical Evidence
No clinical trials performed. Analytical performance established via bench testing: 20-day precision study (n=80 per level), multi-day precision at 3 POC sites (n=75 per level), and whole blood precision (n=21 per level). Linearity confirmed over 20–700 mg/dL range. Method comparison against predicate (n=237 samples) showed high correlation (r=1.000). Interference testing identified hydroxyurea as a potential interferent (>0.43 mmol/L).
Technological Characteristics
Amperometric glucose oxidase biosensor. Cartridge-based test format. Lithium-Ion rechargeable battery. Color LCD touch screen. Wireless connectivity and barcode scanning. 1-point on-board calibration. Traceable to NIST SRM965. Reportable range 20-700 mg/dL. Sample volume 65-95 µL.
Indications for Use
Indicated for quantitative measurement of glucose in arterial and venous whole blood in point-of-care or clinical laboratory settings. Used for diagnosis, monitoring, and treatment of carbohydrate metabolism disorders (e.g., diabetes mellitus, idiopathic hypoglycemia, pancreatic islet cell carcinoma). Not evaluated in neonates.
Regulatory Classification
Identification
A glucose test system is a device intended to measure glucose quantitatively in blood and other body fluids. Glucose measurements are used in the diagnosis and treatment of carbohydrate metabolism disorders including diabetes mellitus, neonatal hypoglycemia, and idiopathic hypoglycemia, and of pancreatic islet cell carcinoma.
Special Controls
*Classification.* Class II (special controls). The device, when it is solely intended for use as a drink to test glucose tolerance, is exempt from the premarket notification procedures in subpart E of part 807 of this chapter subject to the limitations in § 862.9.
Predicate Devices
i-STAT 1 Wireless Analyzer (k103195)
Submission Summary (Full Text)
{0}
1
# 510(k) SUBSTANTIAL EQUIVALENCE DETERMINATION DECISION SUMMARY ASSAY ONLY TEMPLATE
A. 510(k) Number:
k163271
B. Purpose for Submission:
Adding previously cleared glucose assay to the i-STAT Alinity System
C. Measurand:
Glucose
D. Type of Test:
Quantitative amperometric assay, glucose oxidase
E. Applicant:
Abbott Point of Care, Inc.
F. Proprietary and Established Names:
i-STAT Alinity System with the i-STAT Glucose test
G. Regulatory Information:
| Product Code | Regulation | Classification | Panel |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| CGA | 21 CFR §862.1345, Glucose test system | Class II | Clinical Chemistry (75) |
H. Intended Use:
1. Intended use(s):
See Indications for use below.
{1}
2. Indication(s) for use:
The i-STAT Alinity System with i-STAT Glucose test is intended for use in point of care or clinical laboratory settings. The i-STAT Alinity System with Glucose test is intended for the quantitative measurement of glucose in arterial and venous whole blood.
Glucose measurements are used in the diagnosis, monitoring, and treatment of carbohydrate metabolism disorders including, but not limited to, diabetes mellitus, idiopathic hypoglycemia, and pancreatic islet cell carcinoma.
The i-STAT Glucose test with the i-STAT Alinity System has not been evaluated in neonates.
For in vitro diagnostic use.
3. Special conditions for use statement(s):
For prescription use only
For point-of-care or clinical laboratory setting
4. Special instrument requirements:
i-STAT Alinity Instrument
I. Device Description:
The i-STAT test cartridge contains test reagents which are located on the sensors. The instrument interacts with the cartridge to move fluid across the sensors and generate a quantitative result. Cartridges require two to three drops of whole blood which are typically applied to the cartridge using a syringe.
For cartridges that contain a sensor for the measurement of glucose, a list of reactive ingredients is indicated below:
| Reactive Ingredient | Biological Source | Minimum Quantity |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Glucose | N/A | 7 mmol/L |
| Glucose Oxidase | Aspergillus Niger | 0.002 IU |
The i-STAT Glucose test was most recently cleared under k103195. The i-STAT glucose test is included in previously cleared i-STAT test cartridges (E3+, EC4+, EC8+, CG8+, CHEM8+, and 6+).
{2}
J. Substantial Equivalence Information:
1. Predicate device name(s):
i-STAT 1 Wireless Analyzer
2. Predicate 510(k) number(s):
k103195
3. Comparison with predicate:
| Similarities | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Item | Candidate Device (k163271) | Predicate Device (k103195) |
| Intended Use | The test for glucose is intended for use in the in vitro quantification of glucose in whole blood. | Same |
| Calibration | 1-point on-board (contained within the cartridge) | Same |
| Reportable Range | 20 – 700 mg/dL | Same |
| Sample Volume | 65 – 95 μL | Same |
| Traceability | NIST SRM965 | Same |
| Principle of Measurement | Glucose is measured amperometrically. Oxidation of glucose, catalyzed by the enzyme glucose oxidase, produces hydrogen peroxide (H2O2). | Same |
| Test Format | Cartridge | Same |
| Test Storage | Storage: 2°C to 8°C (35-46°F) | Same |
| Quality Checks | A series of quality checks are automatically run each test cycle prior to the system generating a result. Quality checks verify the analyzer motor, electrical, pressure and temperature systems and cartridge elements. | Same |
| Time to test | ~2 minutes | Same |
{3}
| Differences | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Item | Candidate Device (k163271) | Predicate Device (k103195) |
| Sample type | Fresh arterial or venous whole blood. | Fresh arterial, venous or capillary whole blood |
K. Standard/Guidance Document Referenced (if applicable):
CLSI EP05-A3, Evaluation of Precision of Quantitative Measurement Procedures; Approved Guideline
CLSI EP06-A, Evaluation of the Linearity of Quantitative Measurement Procedures: A Statistical Approach; Approved Guideline
CLSI EP07-A2, Interference Testing in Clinical Chemistry; Approved Guideline-Second Edition
CLSI EP09-A3, Measurement Procedure Comparison and Bias Estimation Using Patient Samples; Approved Guideline
CLSI EP 17-A2, Evaluation of Detection Capability for Clinical Laboratory Measurement Procedures; Approved Guideline
L. Test Principle:
The i-STAT Glucose test is measured amperometrically. In amperometric measurements, a potential is applied to the measuring electrode while current generated by the resulting oxidation or reduction reactions in the test system is measured. The current generated is directly proportional to the concentration of the analyte. Oxidation of glucose, catalyzed by the enzyme glucose oxidase, produces hydrogen peroxide (H₂O₂). The liberated hydrogen peroxide is oxidized at the electrode to produce an electrical current that is proportional to the sample glucose concentration.
M. Performance Characteristics (if/when applicable):
1. Analytical performance:
All performance studies for the i-STAT Glucose test were conducted using the i-STAT EC4+ cartridge. The glucose test included in the EC4+ cartridge is identical to the assay cleared in k103195 and is representative for the glucose assay found in all i-STAT cartridges that include the glucose assay.
{4}
a. Precision/Reproducibility:
# i.) 20 day Precision study at internal site
The precision of the i-STAT Glucose Test on the i-STAT Alinity System was evaluated using one lot of 5 levels of i-STAT Calibration Verification material. The study was conducted by two operators using 10 instruments and one $\mathrm{EC4 + }$ cartridge lot over 20 days at one site. The results are shown below:
| Level | N | Mean (mg/dL) | Within-run | | Between Run | | Total | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | | SD | %CV | SD | %CV | SD | %CV |
| CV L1 | 80 | 26.9 | 0.22 | 0.82 | 0.34 | 1.26 | 0.42 | 1.56 |
| CV L2 | 80 | 41.0 | 0.20 | 0.49 | 0.18 | 0.44 | 0.34 | 0.83 |
| CV L3 | 80 | 125.0 | 0.21 | 0.17 | 0.23 | 0.18 | 0.32 | 0.26 |
| CV L4 | 80 | 286.7 | 0.53 | 0.18 | 0.52 | 0.18 | 0.77 | 0.27 |
| CV L5 | 80 | 600.6 | 2.42 | 0.40 | 2.26 | 0.38 | 3.47 | 0.58 |
# ii.) Multi-day Precision Study at 3 POC sites (using aqueous materials)
Multi-day precision was evaluated by testing one lot of 5 levels of i-STAT TriControl Calibration Verification material at each of 3 sites for five days. One lot of $\mathrm{EC4 + }$ cartridges was included in the testing. The same 5 instruments were used at each site for all 5 days of testing at sites 1, 2, and 4. The results are shown below:
| Level | Site | N | Mean (mg/dL) | Within-Run | | Within-Site (Total) | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | | | SD | CV (%) | SD | CV (%) |
| CV L1 | 1 | 25 | 580.8 | 3.28 | 0.57 | 4.74 | 0.82 |
| | 2 | 25 | 589.1 | 2.94 | 0.50 | 4.27 | 0.72 |
| | 4 | 25 | 580.8 | 4.24 | 0.73 | 4.76 | 0.82 |
| | Combined | 75 | 583.5 | 3.53 | 0.61 | 4.59 | 0.79 |
| CV L2 | 1 | 25 | 270.0 | 0.73 | 0.27 | 1.02 | 0.38 |
| | 2 | 25 | 272.3 | 1.03 | 0.38 | 1.36 | 0.50 |
| | 4 | 25 | 270.3 | 0.68 | 0.25 | 1.09 | 0.40 |
| | Combined | 75 | 270.9 | 0.83 | 0.31 | 1.17 | 0.43 |
| CV L3 | 1 | 25 | 129.4 | 0.35 | 0.27 | 0.62 | 0.48 |
| | 2 | 25 | 130.1 | 0.49 | 0.38 | 0.83 | 0.64 |
| | 4 | 25 | 130.0 | 0.68 | 0.52 | 0.68 | 0.52 |
| | Combined | 75 | 129.8 | 0.53 | 0.41 | 0.71 | 0.55 |
{5}
| Level | Site | N | Mean (mg/dL) | Within-Run | | Within-Site (Total) | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | | | SD | CV (%) | SD | CV (%) |
| CV L4 | 1 | 25 | 42.3 | 0.47 | 1.11 | 0.48 | 1.13 |
| | 2 | 25 | 42.7 | 0.47 | 1.10 | 0.57 | 1.34 |
| | 4 | 25 | 43.0 | 0.51 | 1.19 | 0.63 | 1.46 |
| | Combined | 75 | 42.7 | 0.48 | 1.13 | 0.56 | 1.32 |
| CV L5 | 1 | 25 | 30.5 | 0.45 | 1.47 | 0.61 | 2.00 |
| | 2 | 25 | 30.5 | 0.37 | 1.23 | 0.53 | 1.75 |
| | 4 | 25 | 30.9 | 0.42 | 1.37 | 0.44 | 1.43 |
| | Combined | 75 | 30.6 | 0.42 | 1.36 | 0.53 | 1.74 |
iii.) Precision study at 3 POC sites (using whole blood (WB))
The precision of the i-STAT Glucose Test on the i-STAT Alinity System was evaluated using venous whole blood (native and altered) samples targeted to six different glucose levels (30 - 50 mg/dL, 51 - 110 mg/dL, 111 - 150 mg/dL, 151 - 250 mg/dL, 251 - 400 mg/dL, and 401 - 700 mg/dL) within the i-STAT Glucose test reportable range. One EC4+ test cartridge lot was used across 3 point of care sites. At each site, each sample was tested 3 times on each of 7 i-STAT Alinity instruments (total of 21 test results per sample). The results are shown below:
| Concentration Level mg/dL | Site | N | Mean (mg/dL) | Within-Instrument | | Total | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | | | SD | %CV | SD | %CV |
| 30-50 | 1 | 21 | 37.1 | 0.36 | 0.97 | 0.36 | 0.97 |
| | 2 | 21 | 35.3 | 0.56 | 1.59 | 0.56 | 1.59 |
| | 4 | 21 | 43.6 | 0.51 | 1.16 | 0.51 | 1.16 |
| 51-110 | 1 | 21 | 104.0 | 0.22 | 0.21 | 0.22 | 0.21 |
| | 2 | 21 | 84.5 | 0.51 | 0.61 | 0.51 | 0.61 |
| | 4 | 21 | 92.7 | 0.46 | 0.50 | 0.46 | 0.50 |
| 111-150 | 1 | 21 | 134.6 | 0.49 | 0.36 | 0.51 | 0.38 |
| | 2 | 21 | 120.3 | 0.64 | 0.54 | 0.64 | 0.54 |
| | 4 | 21 | 115.3 | 0.48 | 0.42 | 0.48 | 0.42 |
| 151-250 | 1 | 21 | 182.9 | 0.70 | 0.38 | 0.70 | 0.38 |
| | 2 | 21 | 194.0 | 0.63 | 0.33 | 0.63 | 0.33 |
| | 4 | 21 | 217.2 | 0.49 | 0.22 | 0.54 | 0.25 |
| 251-400 | 1 | 21 | 347.3 | 1.71 | 0.49 | 1.71 | 0.49 |
| | 2 | 21 | 352.0 | 1.43 | 0.41 | 1.43 | 0.41 |
| | 4 | 21 | 348.7 | 2.53 | 0.73 | 2.53 | 0.73 |
{6}
| Concentration Level mg/dL | Site | N | Mean (mg/dL) | Within-Instrument | | Total | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | | | SD | %CV | SD | %CV |
| 401-700 | 1 | 21 | 548.9 | 7.46 | 1.36 | 7.46 | 1.36 |
| | 2 | 21 | 575.8 | 2.60 | 0.45 | 2.81 | 0.49 |
| | 4 | 21 | 526.5 | 3.56 | 0.68 | 3.56 | 0.68 |
# b. Linearity/assay reportable range:
The study was designed based on CLSI EP06-A guideline. The linearity of the i-STAT Glucose test on the i-STAT Alinity System was evaluated by preparing a series of glucose concentration levels in whole blood that spanned the reportable range of the test. Whole blood was obtained from a healthy subject and altered to produce a high sample pool and a low sample pool. Intermediate test samples were created from the high and low pool. The test sample expected values are found in the table below. An assessment of linearity was performed using polynomial regression analysis for $1^{\text{st}}$ , $2^{\text{nd}}$ , and $3^{\text{rd}}$ order polynomials. The i-STAT Alinity Glucose test results were plotted against the expected concentrations. Analysis of the regression coefficients (using a significance level of 0.05) showed that the nonlinear coefficients in both the second and third order were significant with p-values of the coefficients less than 0.05. The $2^{\text{nd}}$ order was determined to have the best fit and was used for the assessment of degree of non-linearity. The degree of nonlinearity acceptance criteria analysis results are as follows:
| Sample ID | Expected Values (mg/dL) | Acceptance criteria | Absolute Degree of Nonlinearity | Pass/Fail |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| B1 | 787.8 | 39.4 | 23.8 | Pass |
| B2 | 691.6 | 34.6 | 15.6 | Pass |
| B3 | 595.3 | 29.8 | 8.9 | Pass |
| B4 | 499.0 | 25.0 | 3.7 | Pass |
| B5 | 393.5 | 19.7 | 0.0 | Pass |
| B6 | 287.2 | 14.4 | 1.8 | Pass |
| B7 | 180.1 | 9.0 | 1.7 | Pass |
| B8 | 120.0 | 6.0 | 0.7 | Pass |
| B9 | 85.4 | 4.3 | 0.1 | Pass |
| B10 | 45.3 | 3 | 1.3 | Pass |
| B11 | 17.6 | 3 | 2.4 | Pass |
For all test samples, the absolute value of the degree of non-linearity met the predefined acceptance criterion of less than or equal to the greater of $3\mathrm{mg / dL}$ or $5\%$ of expected value (glucose concentration, $\mathrm{mg / dL}$ ). The degree of nonlinearity analysis demonstrates that the i-STAT Glucose test used with the i-STAT Alinity instrument is linear over the claimed reportable range of the glucose test of $20 - 700\mathrm{mg / dL}$ .
{7}
c. Traceability, Stability, Expected values (controls, calibrators, or methods):
The i-STAT glucose test and glucose values assigned to i-STAT controls and calibration verification materials are traceable to the U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) standard reference material SRM965.
The stability of the glucose test was previously cleared in k103195.
The instrument calibration is a one-point on board calibration and is performed each time a cartridge requiring calibration is used. This one-point calibration adjusts the offset of the stored calibration curve.
The i-STAT Controls and i-STAT Calibration Verification Material were previously cleared in k972868 and stability/value assignment information can be found in k972868.
d. Detection limit:
The detection limits are supported by the linearity study (see M.1.b. above). In addition, a LoQ study was performed to verify the low end of the claimed measuring range.
The study was based on the CLSI EP17-A2 guideline. The LoQ of the i-STAT Glucose test on the i-STAT Alinity System was evaluated on 36 instruments using whole blood that was altered to low glucose concentrations (< 20 mg/dL) and two EC4+ test cartridge lots over four days by three operators. The LoQ for the i-STAT Glucose test on the i-STAT Alinity System was determined to be 5.558 mg/dL.
The i-STAT Glucose test on the i-STAT Alinity system has a measuring range of 20–700 mg/dL.
e. Analytical specificity:
The interference performance of the i-STAT Glucose test on the i-STAT Alinity System was evaluated based on CLSI EP07-A2 guideline. The interference performance was evaluated using whole blood samples at two glucose concentrations (low 70 – 90 mg/dL and high 110–130 mg/dL glucose concentrations). The effect of each potentially interfering compound was evaluated by comparing the performance of a test sample spiked to a high concentration of the compound and a control test sample spiked with an equal volume of solvent. A compound was identified as an interferent if the difference between the spiked test sample and the control was > 10% of the mean of glucose test results for the control sample.
8
{8}
| Compound | Highest concentration tested with no observed significant interference | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | mmol/L (unless specified) | mg/dL** |
| Acetaminophen | 1.33 | 20.10 |
| Acetaldehyde | 0.045 | 0.20 |
| Acetoacetate | 2.0 | 21.60 |
| L-Ascorbic Acid | 0.342 | 6.02 |
| Acetyl Cysteine | 10.2 | 166.45 |
| Ammonium Chloride | 2.0 | 10.70 |
| Bromide | 37.5 | 325.69 |
| β-Hydroxybutyric Acid | 6.00 | 62.47 |
| Dopamine | 0.006 | 0.09 |
| Ethanol | 86.8 | 399.89 |
| Fluoride | 0.105 | 0.27 |
| Formaldehyde | 0.133 | 0.40 |
| Glycolic Acid | 10.0 | 76.05 |
| Gentamicin | 0.021 | 3.13 |
| Glucosamine | 0.030 | 0.54 |
| Glutathione, reduced | 3 | 92.20 |
| Guaifenesin | 15 | 297.33 |
| Hemoglobin* | 2 g/L | 200 |
| Heparin | 3 U/mL | n/a |
| Ibuprofen | 2.425 | 50.03 |
| Isoniazid | 0.292 | 4.00 |
| Lactate | 6.6 | 63.37 |
| Mannose | 1.00 | 18.02 |
| Maltose | 13.3 | 455.26 |
| pH | 8.0 | n/a |
| Pyruvate | 0.309 | 2.90 |
| Salicylate | 4.34 | 62.52 |
| Thiocyanate | 6.9 | 44.86 |
| Triglyceride | 37 | 3233.80 |
| Uric Acid | 1.4 | 23.54 |
| Sodium Thiosulfate | 16.7 | 264.04 |
| Bilirubin | 0.342 | 19 |
| Cholesterol | 13 | 503 |
| Creatinine | 0.442 | 5 |
| Fructose | 1 | 18 |
| Galactose | 0.84 | 15 |
| Xylose | 3 | 45 |
{9}
*Tested in g/L
**The molecular weight of the substance tested was used to convert the test concentration from mmol/L to mg/dL. The molecular weight of each substance could vary depending on the form chosen.
Hydroxyurea at a concentration of $0.92\mathrm{mmol / L}$ $(7.0\mathrm{mg / dL})$ interferes with the i-STAT Glucose test on the i-STAT Alinity System. Hydroxyurea dose response testing was performed and results showed that hydroxyurea concentration above $0.43\mathrm{mmol / L}$ may give a falsely elevated i-STAT glucose test result of more than $10\%$ .
The sponsor includes the following limitations in the labeling:
"An alternative method should be used if it is suspected that the patient have been administered hydroxyurea. A hydroxyurea concentration above $0.43\mathrm{mmol / L}$ may give a falsely elevated i-STAT glucose test results of more than $10\%$ .
f. Assay cut-off:
Not applicable.
# 2. Comparison studies:
a. Method comparison with predicate device:
The method comparison study compared the results of the i-STAT Glucose Test on the i-STAT Alinity System to the i-STAT Glucose Test performance on the i-STAT 1 Wireless Analyzer (predicate). This study was conducted across 3 point of care sites, performed in the intensive care unit (ICU), blood gas lab, emergency department (ED) and general hospital wards. A total of 145 lithium heparin venous whole blood specimens and 92 lithium heparin arterial whole blood specimens were tested using one lot of i-STAT EC4+ cartridges. Twelve specimens were contrived $(5.1\%)$ . Weighted Deming regression analysis comparing the first replicate of the candidate device results to the mean of the predicate device results yielded the following results:
Individual POC Sites
| Site | N | Sample Range tested mg/dL | Regression Equation | “r” |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 1 | 77 | 46 - 673 | y = 0.996x + 1.527 | 1.000 |
| 2 | 92 | 45 - 653 | y = 1.000x + 1.077 | 1.000 |
| 4 | 68 | 24 - 620 | y = 0.999x + 1.050 | 1.000 |
{10}
All Sites Combined
| N | Sample Range tested mg/dL | Regression Equation | “r” |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 237 | 24 - 673 | y = 0.999x + 1.164 | 1.000 |
b. Matrix comparison:
A matrix comparison study comparing non-anticoagulated venous whole blood and anti-coagulated venous whole blood (lithium heparin) was performed. The reference matrix for this study is heparinized venous whole blood (lithium heparin collection tubes) and the test condition is the non-anticoagulated venous whole blood sample collected without anticoagulant. A total of 40 matched venous whole blood samples were tested using the i-STAT Glucose test on 8 i-STAT Alinity Systems. Deming regression analysis between first individual non-anticoagulated result and the heparinized mean result yielded the following regression results.
| N | Sample Range | Regression Equation | “r” |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 40 | 41 - 493 mg/dL | y = 1.000x + 0.34 | 1.000 |
Non-anticoagulated venous whole blood and anticoagulated (lithium heparin) venous whole blood samples are acceptable for use with the i-STAT Alinity System with the i-STAT Glucose test.
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:
Not applicable.
{11}
5. Expected values/Reference range:
| Test/Abbreviation | Units | Reference Range^{1} |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Glucose/Glu
(fasting) | mg/dL | 70 - 105 |
| | mmol/L | 3.9 – 5.8 |
| | g/L | 0.70 – 1.05 |
¹P.C. Painter, J.Y. Cope, J.L. Smith, “Reference Ranges, table 41-20” in Tietz Textbook of Clinical Chemistry – Second Edition, C.A. Burtis and E.R Ashwood, eds. (Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders Company, 1994).
The reference range for whole blood with the i-STAT Glucose test on the i-STAT Alinity System listed above is similar to reference ranges derived from serum or plasma measurements with standard laboratory methods. The reference range shown above is intended to be used as a guide for the interpretation of results. Since reference ranges may vary with demographic factors such as age, gender and heritage, it is recommended that reference ranges be determined for the population being tested. Each facility should establish its own reference range to assure proper representation of specific populations.
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.