For in vitro diagnostic use only. VITROS Chemistry Products GLU Slides quantitatively measure glucose (GLU) concentration in serum, plasma, urine, and cerebrospinal fluid using VITROS Systems. 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.
Device Story
VITROS Chemistry Products GLU Slides are multilayered analytical elements for quantitative glucose measurement. Device processes patient samples (serum, plasma, urine, CSF) deposited on slide; spreading layer distributes sample to underlying reagent layers. Glucose oxidase catalyzes glucose oxidation to hydrogen peroxide and gluconate; peroxidase catalyzes oxidative coupling with dye precursors to produce dye. Reflectance spectrophotometry on VITROS 4600 System measures dye intensity. Modification from predicate (k955286) reduces surface area, reagent amounts, and sample volume (from 10 μL to 6 μL). Used in clinical laboratories by trained personnel. Output is glucose concentration (mg/dL) used by clinicians for diagnosis and management of metabolic disorders.
Clinical Evidence
No clinical studies performed. Evidence consists of analytical bench testing including precision (n=88), linearity, limit of detection/quantitation, and interference studies (endogenous/exogenous substances) per CLSI guidelines (EP5-A3, EP6-A, EP9-A3, EP7-A2, EP17-A2). Method comparison against predicate showed high correlation (r ≥ 0.999) across serum, urine, and CSF matrices. Matrix comparison confirmed suitability of various plasma anticoagulants.
Technological Characteristics
Multilayered analytical element on polyester support. Reagents: glucose oxidase, peroxidase, 1,7-dihydroxynaphthalene, 4-aminoantipyrine hydrochloride. Principle: enzymatic endpoint colorimetric assay via reflectance spectrophotometry. Dimensions/form factor: slide-based. Connectivity: used on VITROS 4600 System. Sterilization: not applicable (in vitro diagnostic reagent).
Indications for Use
Indicated for quantitative measurement of glucose in serum, plasma, urine, and cerebrospinal fluid for the diagnosis and treatment of carbohydrate metabolism disorders, including diabetes mellitus, neonatal hypoglycemia, idiopathic hypoglycemia, and pancreatic islet cell carcinoma.
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
VITROS Chemistry Products GLU Slides (k955286)
Submission Summary (Full Text)
{0}
1
# 510(k) SUBSTANTIAL EQUIVALENCE DETERMINATION DECISION SUMMARY ASSAY ONLY TEMPLATE
A. 510(k) Number:
k163433
B. Purpose for Submission:
Modification of the previously cleared Glucose Slides (k955286) to reduce the surface area and amount of reagent in the slide and decrease the sample volume required for testing.
C. Measurand:
Glucose
D. Type of Test:
Quantitative, Colorimetric
E. Applicant:
Ortho Clinical Diagnostics
F. Proprietary and Established Names:
VITROS Chemistry Products GLU Slides
G. Regulatory Information:
1. Regulation section:
21 CFR § 862.1345, Glucose test system.
2. Classification:
Class II
3. Product code:
CGA
{1}
4. Panel:
Clinical Chemistry (75)
H. Intended Use:
1. Intended use(s):
See Indication(s) for use below.
2. Indication(s) for use:
For in vitro diagnostic use only. VITROS Chemistry Products GLU Slides are used on VITROS Systems to quantitatively measure glucose (GLU) concentration in serum, plasma, urine and cerebrospinal fluid. 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.
3. Special conditions for use statement(s):
For in vitro diagnostic use only
For prescription use only
4. Special instrument requirements:
VITROS 4600 Systems
I. Device Description:
The VITROS GLU Slide is a multilayered, analytical element coated on a polyester support with the following reagents (reactive ingredients per cm²):
Glucose oxidase (Aspergillus sp.) 0.77 U
Peroxidase (horseradish root) 3.6 U
1,7-dihydroxynaphthalene (dye precursor) 67 µg
4-aminoantipyrine hydrochloride (dye precursor) 0.11 mg
J. Substantial Equivalence Information:
1. Predicate device name(s):
VITROS Chemistry Products GLU Slides
2. Predicate 510(k) number(s):
k955286
2
{2}
3. Comparison with predicate:
| Similarities | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Item | Candidate Device VITROS GLU Slide k163433 | Predicate Device VITROS GLU Slide k955286 |
| Intended Use | For quantitatively measure of glucose concentration in serum, plasma, urine, and cerebrospinal fluid | Same |
| Basic Principle | Enzymatic endpoint test using reflectance spectrophotometry | Same |
| Sample type | Serum, plasma, urine and cerebrospinal fluid | Same |
| Assay Range | Serum: 20 - 625 mg/dL Urine and CSF: 20 - 650 mg/dL | Same |
| Incubation time and temperature | 5 minutes at 37°C | Same |
| Differences | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Item | Candidate Device VITROS® GLU Slide k163433 | Predicate Device VITROS® GLU Slide k955286 |
| Sample volume | 6 μL | 10 μL |
| Amount of slide reactive ingredients per slide (test) | Glucose oxidase 0.70 U peroxidase 3.3 U 1,7-dihydroxynaphthalene 60 μg 4- aminoantipyrine hydrochloride 0.10 mg | Glucose oxidase 0.99 U peroxidase 4.7 U 1,7- dihydroxynaphthalene 86 μg 4- aminoantipyrine hydrochloride 0.14 mg |
K. Standard/Guidance Document Referenced (if applicable):
CLSI-EP5-A3: Evaluation of Precision of Quantitative Measurement Procedures; Approved Guideline - Third Edition
CLSI-EP6-A: Evaluation of the Linearity of Quantitative Measurement Procedures: A Statistical Approach; Approved Guideline
CLSI-EP9-A3: Measurement Procedure Comparison and Bias Estimation Using Patient Samples; Approved Guideline - Third Edition
CLSI-EP7-A2: Interference Testing in Clinical Chemistry; Approved Guideline - Second Edition
{3}
CLSI-EP17-A2: Evaluation of Detection Capability for Clinical Laboratory Measurement Procedures; Approved Guideline - Second Edition
# L. Test Principle:
A drop of patient sample is deposited on the slide and is evenly distributed by the spreading layer to the underlying layers. The oxidation of sample glucose is catalyzed by glucose oxidase to form hydrogen peroxide and gluconate. This reaction is followed by an oxidative coupling catalyzed by peroxidase in the presence of dye precursors to produce a dye. The intensity of the dye is measured by reflected light.

Reaction Scheme
# M. Performance Characteristics (if/when applicable):
# 1. Analytical performance:
# a. Precision/Reproducibility:
Within-day and within-lab precision studies for the VITROS GLU assay were performed in accordance to CLSI EP5-A3 guideline. Precision studies were performed using 2 serum controls, 2 serum pools, 2 urine controls, 1 urine pool, 2 CSF controls and 3 CSF pools. Samples were analyzed in duplicate, over the course of 22 working days using 3 lots of VITROS GLU slides on VITROS 4600 chemistry system $(n = 88)$ . The precision results of one representative lot are summarized in the table below:
| Samples | Mean (mg/dL) | Within Day | | Within Lab | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | SD | %CV | SD | %CV |
| Serum Control I | 90.3 | 0.6 | 0.8 | 1.5 | 1.6 |
| Serum Control II | 287.2 | 1.6 | 0.7 | 3.4 | 1.2 |
| Serum Pool 1 | 29.4 | 0.2 | 0.5 | 0.4 | 1.3 |
| Serum Pool 2 | 571.2 | 3.3 | 0.6 | 5.0 | 0.9 |
| Urine Control 1 | 31.6 | 0.3 | 1.1 | 0.5 | 1.5 |
| Urine Control 2 | 301.4 | 2.8 | 0.9 | 4.5 | 1.5 |
| Urine Pool | 574.5 | 4.1 | 0.7 | 5.5 | 1.0 |
| CSF Pool 1 | 37.2 | 0.3 | 0.9 | 0.6 | 1.5 |
| CSF Control I | 49.2 | 0.5 | 0.7 | 0.6 | 1.3 |
| CSF Control II | 88.9 | 0.6 | 0.9 | 1.1 | 1.2 |
| CSF Pool 2 | 283.0 | 1.7 | 0.9 | 3.55 | 1.3 |
| CSF Pool 3 | 609.3 | 2.6 | 0.8 | 4.0 | 0.7 |
{4}
# b. Linearity/assay reportable range:
Linearity was determined following CLSI EP06-A guideline. A high glucose pool was intermixed with a low pool to generate 14 concentration levels each tested in six replicate determinations for each sample type (serum, urine and CSF) and compared to hexokinase reference value. The linearity study supports the claimed measuring range for each sample type, as shown in the table below.
| Sample Type | Slope | Intercept | Correlation Coefficient | Linear Range (mg/dL) | Claimed measuring range (mg/dL) |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Serum | 0.98 | 1.56 | 1.00 | 17.1 – 662.2 | 20-625 |
| Urine | 0.995 | 0.015 | 0.999 | 17.0 - 693.0 | 20-650 |
| CSF | 0.98 | 1.47 | 1.00 | 16.0 - 672.7 | 20-650 |
# c. Traceability, Stability, Expected values (controls, calibrators, or methods):
VITROS GLU slides are calibrated with the VITROS Chemistry Products Calibrator Kit 1, which is traceable to the Certified NIST (National Institute of Standards and Technology) Reference Material, SRM 917.
# Stability:
The shelf-life, on-board and on-analyzer (with system turned off) stability testing protocols and acceptance criteria were reviewed and found to be acceptable to support the following stability claims:
| Shelf life at -18°C | 18 months |
| --- | --- |
| On-board stability | 1 week |
| On-analyzer stability (system turned off) | Up to 2 hours |
# d. Detection limit:
The limit of blank (LoB), limit of detection (LoD), and limit of quantitation (LoQ) of the VITROS GLU assay were determined according to CLSI EP17-A2 guideline. Detection limit summary protocols:
| Serum | LoB | Four blanks samples were prepared by dialyzing serum samples with saline. Samples were tested on 6 replicates per run for 4 days using 3 VITROS GLU slide lots (n = 24 per sample). |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | LoD and LoQ | Four serum samples were depleted to have 1 mg/dL glucose concentration then spiked with glucose stock solution to achieve the following target concentrations: 5, 10, 15, 20 mg/dL. Samples were tested in 16 replicates per day for 4 days using 3 VITROS GLU slide lots (n = 64 per sample). |
{5}
6
| Urine | LoB | Four blank samples were prepared by depleting glucose from urine samples. Each sample was tested in 6 replicates per run over 4 days using 3 VITROS GLU slide lots (n=48 per sample). |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | LoD and LoQ | Four urine samples were spiked with glucose stock solution to target concentrations of 10 to 20 mg/dL. Each sample was tested in 6 replicates per run for 4 days using 3 lots of VITROS GLU slides (n = 24 per sample). |
| CSF | LoB | Four LoB fluids (plasma converted serum and 0.9% saline base pools) were run with 10 replicates per run, two runs per day over five days using 3 lots of VITROS GLU slides (n = 100 per sample). |
| | LoD and LoQ | Five fluids mixtures of the LoB base pool and 0.9% saline base pools were spiked with a β-D(+)glucose solution to target concentrations of 8, 12, 16, 20, 24 mg/dL. Each sample was evaluated in 6 replicates per run, with two runs per day over 5 days using 3 lots of VITROS GLU slides (n = 60 per sample). |
The limit of quantitation is defined as the lowest amount of analyte in the sample that can be quantitatively determined with an imprecision of ≤20% and total allowable error of ≤30%.
The detection limits of the modified VITROS GLU Slides assay are summarized below:
| Sample | LoB (mg/dL) | LoD (mg/dL) | LoQ (mg/dL) |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Serum | 1 | 2 | 9 |
| Urine | 7 | 8 | 18 |
| CSF | 4 | 5 | 20 |
The sponsor claimed measuring range is 20 - 625 mg/dL for serum and 20 - 650 mg/dL for urine and CSF.
e. Analytical specificity:
Interference studies were performed according to CLSI EP7-A2 guideline to determine the effects of endogenous and exogenous substances on the performance of the VITROS Chemistry Products GLU Slides assay for serum, urine and CSF on VITROS 4600 chemistry analyzer.
Serum
Two levels of glucose approximately 80 mg/dL and 215 mg/dL were spiked with different concentrations of interference substances and tested using the VITROS
{6}
Chemistry Products GLU Slides. The results of the spiked samples were compared to the results of the non-spiked samples. The bias was calculated using the formula shown below:
Bias = (mean concentration of test substance pool) - (mean concentration of control pool)
The sponsor defined no significant interference for serum as summarized in the following table:
| Glu Concentration mg/dL | Bias |
| --- | --- |
| ≤120 | ± 4.42 mg/dL |
| ≥120 | ± 3.7% mg/dL |
The substances that showed not to interfere in serum are summarized in the following table:
| Substances | Highest concentration tested that showed non-significant interference |
| --- | --- |
| Acetaminophen | 15 mg/dL |
| Alprazolam | 0.2 mg/dL |
| Amlodipine | 10 μg/dL |
| Amoxicillin | 7.53 mg/dL |
| Ascorbic Acid | 5.93 mg/dL |
| Atorvastatin calcium | 72.6 mg/dL |
| Benazepril | 2.21 mg/dL |
| Bilirubin, conjugated | 57.64 mg/dL |
| Bilirubin, unconjugated | 40 mg/dL |
| Cefazolin | 125.9 mg/dL |
| Cefoxitin | 69.5 mg/dL |
| Ceftriaxone | 81.0 mg/dL |
| Chlorpropamide | 74.7 mg/dL |
| Cholesterol | 300 mg/dL |
| Creatinine | 15 mg/dL |
| Diphenhydramine | 0.50 mg/dL |
| Dipyrone (metamizole) | 18 mg/dL |
| Dobutamine | 30 μg/dL |
| Dopamine | 90 μg/dL |
| Ethamsylate(Etamsylate) | 3.14 mg/dL |
| Ethanol | 400 mg/dL |
| Fructose | 30 mg/dL |
| Furosemide | 6 mg/dL |
| Galactose | 60 mg/dL |
| Gentisic acid | 1.80 mg/dL |
| Glipizide | 0.20 mg/dL |
{7}
| Substances | Highest concentration tested that showed non-significant interference |
| --- | --- |
| Glyburide | 0.192 mg/dL |
| Hydralazine HCl | 0.046 mg/dL |
| Hydrochlorothiazide | 0.60 mg/dL |
| Hydroxyurea | 7 mg/dL |
| Ibuprofen | 50 mg/dL |
| Insulin | 3.12 μg/dL |
| Intralipid | 800 mg/dL |
| Isomaltose | 0.09 mg/dL |
| Isoniazid | 4 mg/dL |
| L-Dopa | 0.98 mg/dL |
| Levothyroxine sodium | 103 μg/dL |
| Losartan potassium | 0.091 mg/dL |
| Maltose | 85 mg/dL |
| Metformin HCl | 5.1 mg/dL |
| Methyldopa | 2 mg/L |
| Naproxen sodium | 54.7 mg/dL |
| Nitrofurantoin | 0.4 mg/dL |
| Omeprazole | 0.60 mg/dL |
| Oxycodone | 0.05mg/dL |
| Propanolol | 0.21 mg/dL |
| Pseudoephedrine | 1 mg/dL |
| Rifampicin (Rifampin) | 6.43 mg/dL |
| Salicylic acid | 60 mg/dL |
| Sodium | 1050 mg/dL |
| Spironolactone | 0.06 mg/dL |
| Theophylline | 4 mg/dL |
| Tolazamide | 28 mg/dL |
| Tolbutamide | 64.1 mg/dL |
| Triglycerides | 800 mg/dL |
| Uric acid | 23 mg/dL |
| Vancomycin | 10 mg/dL |
| Warfarin | 1 mg/dL |
| Xylose | 134 mg/dL |
| Sugar Alcohols: | |
| Mannitol | 0.09 mg/dL |
| Sorbitol | 0.09 mg/dL |
| Xylitol | 0.09 mg/dL |
| Lactitol | 0.09 mg/dL |
| Maltitol 578 | 0.09 mg/dL |
{8}
The results of substances that interfere with glucose determinations in serum are summarized in the table below:
| Interferent | Interferent concentrations | Glucose concentrations tested | Bias |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| N-Acetylcysteine (NAC) | 22.5 | 80 | -5.9 |
| | 15.0 | 120 | -4.5 |
| | 30.0 | 300 | -12.3 |
| Glutathione | 61.5 | 80 | -7.4 |
| | 61.5 | 225 | -13.8 |
| Dextran 40 | 3000 | 80 | +4.7 |
| | 2000 | 225 | +9.3 |
## Urine
The interferent substances were tested for urine at glucose concentrations of approximately 30 mg/dL and 215 mg/dL. The sponsor defined no significant interference for urine as bias ≤ 4.42 mg/dL for glucose concentration below 120 mg/dL and bias ≤ 3.7% mg/dL for glucose concentrations above 120 mg/dL.
The substances that showed not to interfere in urine are summarized in the following table:
| Substances | Highest Concentration Tested that showed non-significant interference |
| --- | --- |
| Boric acid | 6.7 mg/mL |
| Boric acid with Sodium formate | 6.7 mg/mL, 3.35 mg/mL |
| 10% Thymol in Isopropanol | 3.3 mL/L |
| Toluene | 1.3 mL/L |
| Sodium fluoride | 5 g/L |
| Sodium formate | 3.35 mg/mL |
| Sodium oxalate | 60 mg/dL |
| Urea nitrogen | 100 mg/dL |
| Magnesium | 146 mg/dL |
| Protein | 50 mg/dL |
## CSF
A single human CSF patient pool containing glucose approximately 65 mg/dL was used for the hemoglobin interference evaluation. Test substance pools were made by spiking a hemolysate stock solution prepared from human hemoglobin directly into the CSF test pool. The control pool was made by spiking an equivalent volume blank solvent (water) as the hemoglobin stock. Hemoglobin was tested in concentrations of 100, 150, 500 mg/dL in CSF with 6 replicates and 3 lots. The sponsor defined no significant interference as a bias of ≤10% for glucose concentrations above 40 mg/dL.
{9}
Hemoglobin was found not to interfere up to 200 mg/dL at a glucose concentration of 65 mg/dL (bias less than 4 mg/dL).
The following limitations are listed in the package insert:
When using samples with visible hemolysis (Hb >200 mg/dL), there may be a negative bias due to catalase released from the lysis of red blood cells. On VITROS Systems capable of performing Sample Indices using the MicroSensor, the GLU result will be flagged with H (Hemolysis).
Elevated lipids may limit diffusion of oxygen to the reactants. Dilute grossly lipemic samples two-fold before analysis.
For total protein, a negative bias of -4 mg/dL (-0.22 mmol/L) is observed for total protein = 5 g/dL (50 g/L) and a positive bias of +6 mg/dL (+0.33 mmol/L) is noted for total protein = 10 g/dL (100 g/L) at a glucose concentration of 85 mg/dL.
Known interferences in urine:
High levels of ascorbic acid in urine will cause a large negative bias, potentially resulting in values less than the measuring range. The degree of bias is proportional to the ascorbic acid concentration.
Glacial acetic acid at 10 mL/L results in ~4% negative bias. The magnitude of the bias increases with higher concentrations of glacial acetic acid (60 mL/L). Do not use urine specimens with acetic acid as a preservative.
12N Hydrochloric acid (HCl) at 2.5 mL/dL results in a large negative bias, potentially resulting in values less than the measuring range. Do not use urine specimens with HCl as a preservative.
f. Assay cut-off:
Not applicable
2. Comparison studies:
a. Method comparison with predicate device:
Method comparison studies were performed according to CLSI EP9-A3 guideline. A total of 113 serum samples, 105 urine samples and 45 unique CSF samples (plus additional admixture CSF samples to cover claimed range) were assayed on one predicate lot and one modified lot using the VITROS 4600 System.
10
{10}
The results of the linear regression analysis are summarized below:
| Matrix | Slope | Intercept | r | Concentration range (mg/dL) |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Serum | 1.01 | -0.80 | 1.000 | 28-616 |
| Urine | 1.03 | -0.81 | 0.999 | 20-619 |
| CSF | 1.02 | -0.31 | 1.000 | 22-609 |
# b. Matrix comparison:
A total of 68 paired serum and plasma specimens (EDTA, sodium heparin, lithium heparin, and sodium fluoride/potassium oxalate) with concentrations within the claimed measuring range $(20 - 625\mathrm{mg / dL})$ were tested using the modified VITROS GLU Slides on the VITROS 4600 Chemistry System.
The results of the linear regression analysis are summarized in the table below:
| Plasma Type | Slope | Intercept | Correlation (r2) |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Sodium heparin | 1.01 | 3.78 | 1.00 |
| Lithium heparin | 1.00 | 3.36 | 1.00 |
| EDTA | 0.99 | 4.3 | 1.00 |
| Sodium fluoride/potassium oxalate | 0.98 | 5.26 | 1.00 |
The results of the matrix comparison study support that serum and EDTA, sodium heparin, lithium heparin, and sodium fluoride/potassium oxalate plasma specimens are suitable for use with the VITROS Chemistry Products GLU Slides.
# 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:
The following expected values are provided in the product insert based on the literature:
| Serum1 | |
| --- | --- |
| Fasting adults | 74 – 106 mg/dL |
| Urine2 | |
| Random | <30 mg/dL |
| 24-Hour | <500 mg/dL* |
| CSF2 | 40-70 mg/dL |
*Glucose concentration (md/dL) x 24-hour volume (dL) = mg/day
$^{1}$ Tietz NW (ed). Textbook of Clinical Chemistry. ed. 3. Philadelphia: WB Saunders; 1815; 1999
$^{2}$ Tietz NW (ed). Fundamentals of Clinical Chemistry. ed. 2. Philadelphia: WB Saunders; 1213–1214; 1976.
# 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.