K163563 · bioMerieux, Inc. · LON · Mar 13, 2017 · Microbiology
Device Facts
Record ID
K163563
Device Name
VITEK 2 AST-GN Gentamicin (<=1 – >=16 µg/mL)
Applicant
bioMerieux, Inc.
Product Code
LON · Microbiology
Decision Date
Mar 13, 2017
Decision
SESE
Submission Type
Traditional
Regulation
21 CFR 866.1645
Device Class
Class 2
Indications for Use
VITEK® 2 Gram Negative Gentamicin is designed for antimicrobial susceptibility testing of Gram negative bacilli and is intended for use with the VITEK® 2 Compact Systems as a laboratory aid in the determination of in vitro susceptibility to antimicrobial agents. VITEK® 2 Gram Negative Gentamicin is a quantitative test. Gentamicin has been shown to be active against most strains of the microorganisms listed below, according to the FDA label for this antimicrobial. Active in vitro and in clinical infections Citrobacter species Enterobacter species Escherichia coli Klebsiella species Proteus species Serratia species Pseudomonas aeruginosa The VITEK® 2 Antimicrobial Susceptibility Test (AST) is intended to be used with the VITEK® 2 Systems for the automated quantitative or qualitative susceptibility testing of isolated colonies for the most clinically significant aerobic gram-negative bacilli, Staphylococus spp., Enterococcus spp., Streptococcus spp. and clinically significant yeast.
Device Story
VITEK® 2 AST-GN Gentamicin is an in vitro diagnostic test for determining minimum inhibitory concentrations (MIC) of gentamicin against gram-negative bacilli. The device consists of a test card containing antimicrobial concentrations. The process involves diluting isolated bacterial colonies in 0.45-0.50% saline, rehydrating the card, and loading it into the VITEK® 2 or VITEK® 2 Compact system. The system automatically incubates and monitors bacterial growth in card wells for up to 18 hours. The device functions as a miniaturized version of the broth microdilution method. The system generates a report with MIC values and interpretive categories. Used in clinical laboratories by technicians to guide antimicrobial therapy decisions, the device provides rapid susceptibility data to assist clinicians in selecting effective antibiotic treatments for patients with bacterial infections.
Clinical Evidence
Performance evaluated using 872 clinical isolates and 75 challenge organisms across three sites. Compared against CLSI broth microdilution reference method. Overall essential agreement (EA) was 99.4% and category agreement (CA) was 98.6%. One very major discrepancy (1.3%) and 12 minor discrepancies (1.3%) observed. Reproducibility was 100%. Growth failure rate was 0.1%. Limitations noted for Proteus vulgaris and specific Enterobacteriaceae due to insufficient resistant strains.
Technological Characteristics
Miniaturized broth microdilution card; automated incubation and optical growth monitoring; VITEK® 2 and VITEK® 2 Compact instrument platforms; quantitative MIC determination; saline-based sample preparation.
Indications for Use
Indicated for antimicrobial susceptibility testing of isolated colonies of clinically significant aerobic gram-negative bacilli, including Citrobacter, Enterobacter, E. coli, Klebsiella, Proteus, Serratia, and P. aeruginosa, as well as Staphylococcus spp., Enterococcus spp., Streptococcus spp., and clinically significant yeast.
Regulatory Classification
Identification
A fully automated short-term incubation cycle antimicrobial susceptibility system is a device that incorporates concentrations of antimicrobial agents into a system for the purpose of determining in vitro susceptibility of bacterial pathogens isolated from clinical specimens. Test results obtained from short-term (less than 16 hours) incubation are used to determine the antimicrobial agent of choice to treat bacterial diseases.
Special Controls
*Classification.* Class II (special controls). The special control for this device is FDA's guidance document entitled “Class II Special Controls Guidance Document: Antimicrobial Susceptibility Test (AST) Systems; Guidance for Industry and FDA.”
{0}
Page 1 of 12
# 510(k) SUBSTANTIAL EQUIVALENCE DETERMINATION DECISION SUMMARY
A. 510(k) Number:
K163563
B. Purpose for Submission:
To obtain a substantial equivalence determination for Gentamicin for testing of gram negative bacilli on the VITEK® 2 and VITEK® 2 Compact Antimicrobial Susceptibility Test (AST) Systems
C. Measurand:
The VITEK® 2 AST-Gram Negative card contains the following concentrations of Gentamicin: 4, 8, and 32 µg/mL (equivalent standard method concentration by efficacy in µg/mL). The Gentamicin MIC reporting range for the card is ≤ 1 – ≥ 16 µg/mL.
D. Type of Test:
Automated quantitative or qualitative antimicrobial susceptibility test for Gentamicin
E. Applicant:
bioMérieux, Inc.
F. Proprietary and Established Names:
VITEK® 2 AST- GN Gentamicin (≤ 1 – ≥ 16 µg/mL)
G. Regulatory Information:
1. Regulation section:
21 CFR 866.1645: Fully Automated Short-Term Incubation Cycle Antimicrobial Susceptibility System
2. Classification:
Class II
{1}
Page 2 of 12
3. Product code(s):
LON – Fully automated short-term incubation cycle antimicrobial susceptibility system
LTW – Susceptibility Test Cards, Antimicrobial
LTT – Panels, Test, Susceptibility, Antimicrobial
4. Panel:
Microbiology (83)
H. Intended Use/Indications for Use:
1. Intended Use (s):
The VITEK® 2 Antimicrobial Susceptibility Test (AST) is intended to be used with the VITEK® 2 Systems for the automated quantitative or qualitative susceptibility testing of isolated colonies for the most clinically significant aerobic gram-negative bacilli, *Staphylococcus* spp., *Enterococcus* spp., *Streptococcus* spp. and clinically significant yeast.
2. Indications for Use:
VITEK® 2 AST-Gram Negative Gentamicin is designed for antimicrobial susceptibility testing of Gram negative bacilli and is intended for use with the VITEK® 2 and VITEK® 2 Compact Systems as a laboratory aid in the determination of *in vitro* susceptibility to antimicrobial agents. VITEK® 2 AST-Gram Negative Gentamicin is a quantitative test. Gentamicin has been shown to be active against most strains of the microorganisms listed below, according to the FDA label for this antimicrobial.
Active *in vitro* and in clinical infections
- *Citrobacter* species
- *Enterobacter* species
- *Escherichia coli*
- *Klebsiella* species
- *Proteus* species
- *Serratia* species
- *Pseudomonas aeruginosa*
The VITEK® 2 Antimicrobial Susceptibility Test (AST) is intended to be used with the VITEK® 2 Systems for the automated quantitative or qualitative susceptibility testing of isolated colonies for the most clinically significant aerobic gram-negative bacilli, *Staphylococcus* spp., *Enterococcus* spp., *Streptococcus* spp. and clinically significant yeast.
{2}
Page 3 of 12
3. Special conditions for use statement(s):
For Prescription Use Only
Limitations:
"The ability of the VITEK 2 AST card to detect resistance with the following combination(s) is unknown because resistant strains were not available at the time of comparative testing:
Gentamicin: Proteus vulgaris"
"The ability of the VITEK 2 AST card to detect resistance with the following combination(s) is unknown because an insufficient number of resistant strains were available at the time of comparative testing:
Gentamicin: Citrobacter koseri, Enterobacter aerogenes, Enterobacter cloacae, and Serratia marcescens"
4. Special instrument requirements:
VITEK 2 and VITEK 2 Compact Systems using VITEK 2 Systems 8.01 software
I. Device Description:
The VITEK 2 AST card is a miniaturized, abbreviated and automated version of the doubling dilution technique for determining the minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC). Each VITEK 2 AST card contains 64 wells. A control well(s) which contain only nutrient medium is resident on all cards. The remaining wells contain premeasured portions of antimicrobials combined with the nutrient media. The isolate to be tested is diluted to a standardized concentration with 0.45% to 0.50% saline before being used to rehydrate the antimicrobial medium within the card. The VITEK 2 System will automatically dilute the bacterial suspension to prepare an inoculum for susceptibility cards. Then the VITEK 2 will fill, seal and place the card into the incubator/reader. The VITEK 2 Compact has a manual filling, sealing and loading operation. The VITEK 2 Systems monitor the growth of each well in the card over a defined period of time (up to 24 hours for Streptococcus species). The analysis program determines when a well demonstrates growth based on attenuation of light measured by an optical scanner. This data is used to determine the minimum inhibitory concentration or "MIC" values for the anti-microbial agent. At the completion of the incubation cycle, a report is generated that contains the MIC value along with the interpretive category result for each antimicrobial contained on the card.
VITEK 2 AST-GN Gentamicin has the following concentrations in the card: 4, 8, and 32 µg/mL (equivalent standard method concentration by efficacy in µg/mL). The MIC result range for the VITEK 2 is ≤ 1 - ≥ 16 µg/mL.
{3}
# J. Substantial Equivalence Information:
1. Predicate device name(s):
VITEK 2 AST-GN Doxycycline
2. Predicate $510(\mathbf{k})$ number(s):
K121546
3. Comparison with predicate:
Table 1: Comparison with Predicate Device
| Similarities | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Item | Device: VITEK 2 AST-GN Gentamicin (K163563) | Predicate Device: VITEK 2 AST-GN Doxycycline (K121546) |
| Intended Use | The VITEK 2 Antimicrobial Susceptibility Test (AST) is intended to be used with the VITEK 2 Systems for the automated quantitative or qualitative susceptibility testing of isolated colonies for the most clinically significant aerobic gram-negative bacilli, Staphylococcus spp., Enterococcus spp., Streptococcus spp. and clinically significant yeast. | Same |
| Test Method | Automated quantitative antimicrobial susceptibility test for use with the VITEK 2 and VITEK 2 Compact Systems to determine the in vitro susceptibility of Gram negative bacilli | Same |
| Inoculum | Standardized saline suspension of test organism | Same |
| Test Card | VITEK 2 Gram Negative Susceptibility Test Card | Same |
| Instrument | VITEK 2 and VITEK 2 Compact Systems | Same |
{4}
| Differences | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Item | Device: VITEK 2 AST-GN Gentamicin (K163563) | Predicate Device: VITEK 2 AST-GN Doxycycline (K121546) |
| Antimicrobial Agent | Gentamicin | Doxycycline |
| Antimicrobial Concentrations | 4, 8, 32 μg/mL | 1, 4, 16 μg/mL |
| Reporting Range | ≤ 1 - ≥ 16 μg/mL | ≤ 0.5 - ≥ 16 μg/mL |
| Analysis Algorithm | Unique for gentamicin (Growth pattern analysis) | Unique for doxycycline (Discriminate analysis) |
# K. Standard/Guidance Documents Referenced (if applicable)
FDA Class II Special Controls Guidance Document: Antimicrobial Susceptibility Test (AST) Systems; Guidance for Industry and FDA (Issued August 28, 2009)
- CLSI M07-A9, "Methods for Dilution Antimicrobial Susceptibility Tests for Bacteria that Grow Aerobically; Approved Standard-Ninth Edition" Vol. 32 No. 2 (January 2012)
- CLSI M100-S24, "Performance Standards for Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing"; Twenty-fourth Informational Supplement, Vol. 33 No. 1 (January 2014)
# L. Test Principle:
The VITEK 2 and VITEK 2 Compact Systems utilize automated growth-based detection using attenuation of light measured by an optical scanner. The optics in the systems uses visible light to directly measure organism growth within each of the 64 micro-wells. Transmittance optics is based on an initial light reading of a well before significant growth has begun. Every 15 minutes throughout the incubation cycle (defined period of time based on the VITEK 2 card), light transmittance readings of each well measures organism growth by the amount of light that is prevented from passing through the well. At the completion of the incubation period, the MIC values and their associated interpretive category results for each antimicrobial on the test card are displayed in an automatically generated report.
# M. Performance Characteristics (if/when applicable):
# 1. Analytical performance:
# a. Precision/Reproducibility:
A reproducibility study for the VITEK 2 AST-GN card with Gentamicin was conducted at three clinical sites using ten isolates of gram-negative bacilli consistent with the Intended Use. Testing was performed on three separate days and in triplicate for a total of 270 data points. The isolates tested in the reproducibility study included $K$ pneumoniae pneumoniae (five isolates), Citrobacter braakii (two isolates), Citrobacter freundii (one isolate), and Pseudomonas aeruginosa (two isolates).
{5}
Inocula were prepared using both the auto-dilution and manual dilution methods for testing in the VITEK 2 System. Inocula were prepared by the manual dilution method only for use with the VITEK 2 Compact. The mode MIC value was determined and the reproducibility was calculated based on MIC values that fell within +/- one doubling dilution from the mode MIC value.
For VITEK 2 auto-dilution and manual dilution methods, overall reproducibility was 100% for best- and worst-case scenarios.
For the VITEK 2 Compact manual dilution method, overall reproducibility was 100% for best- and worst-case scenarios.
The combined reproducibility results for all three sites were acceptable.
b. Linearity/assay reportable range:
Not applicable
c. Traceability, Stability, Expected values (controls, calibrators, or methods):
**Inoculum Density Control**
The DensiCHEK Plus was used to standardize the inoculum to a 0.5 McFarland standard. The instrument was standardized daily with all results recorded at each site. Calibration values were within the expected range.
**Purity Check**
A purity check of all organisms was performed on the dilution tube used to prepare the VITEK 2 card inoculum. Only those cultures that were pure were evaluated in the study.
**Growth Failure Rate**
There was one isolate that failed to grow in the VITEK 2 card in the clinical study. Complete test results were available for 872 isolates in a total of 873 clinical isolates. The growth failure rate was 0.1% and was acceptable.
All 75 challenge organisms grew in the VITEK 2 GN card with Gentamicin using both the auto-dilution and manual dilution methods for the VITEK 2 and manual inoculation for the VITEK 2 Compact System.
A total of 947 VITEK 2 AST results were available.
**Quality Control (QC) Testing**
The FDA/CLSI recommended QC organisms (E. coli ATCC 25922 and Pseudomonas aeruginosa ATCC 27853) were tested using both the VITEK 2 card and the reference method at each site. Both the automatic dilution and manual dilution methods were used for the VITEK 2 and the manual dilution method was
Page 6 of 12
{6}
used for the VITEK 2 Compact.
Both the auto-dilution and the manual dilution methods for VITEK 2 and the manual dilution for VITEK 2 Compact were within the expected range $>95\%$ of the time.
Table 2: Quality Control Summary Results for VITEK 2 (Auto-Dilution and Manual Dilution Methods) and VITEK 2 Compact (Manual Dilution Method)
| Gentamicin | | VITEK 2 Auto-Dilution | | VITEK 2 Manual Dilution | | VITEK 2 Compact Manual Dilution | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Organism | Conc. (μg/mL) | Reference | Test | Reference | Test | Reference | Test |
| E. coliATCC 25922Expected Range0.25 - 1 μg/mL(VITEK 2: ≤1μg/mL) | ≤0.0625 | | | | | | |
| | 0.125 | | | | | | |
| | 0.25 | | | | | | |
| | 0.5 | 214 | | 105 | | 105 | |
| | (≤)1* | 11 | 225 | 7 | 112 | 7 | 112 |
| | 2 | | | | | | |
| | 4 | | | | | | |
| | 8 | | | | | | |
| | 16 | | | | | | |
| | 32 | | | | | | |
| | ≥64 | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| P. aeruginosaATCC 27853Expected Range0.5 - 2 μg/mL(VITEK 2: ≤1- 2μg/mL) | ≤0.0625 | | | | | | |
| | 0.125 | | | | | | |
| | 0.25 | | | | | | |
| | 0.5 | 35 | | 17 | | 17 | |
| | ≤1* | 180 | 216 | 85 | 103 | 85 | 102 |
| | 2 | 5 | | 5 | | 5 | 1 |
| | 4 | | | | | | |
| | 8 | | 4 | | 4 | | 4 |
| | 16 | | | | | | |
| | 32 | | | | | | |
| | ≥64 | | | | | | |
*The lowest dilution of the VITEK 2 Gentamicin MIC range is $\leq 1\mu \mathrm{g / mL}$ . Obtaining this value was considered an indicator that the quality control test results were acceptable.
The Gentamicin expected ranges for $E.$ coli ATCC 25922 and $P.$ aeruginosa ATCC 27853 are $0.25 - 1$ and $0.5 - 2\mu \mathrm{g / mL}$ respectively. However, the VITEK 2 MIC reporting range is $\leq 1 - \geq 16\mu \mathrm{g / mL}$ (MIC results: $\leq 1, 2, 4, 8, \geq 16\mu \mathrm{g / mL}$ ). The VITEK 2 systems do not provide results lower than $1\mu \mathrm{g / mL}$ . Therefore, all results for $E.$ coli ATCC 25922 and $P.$ aeruginosa ATCC 27853 were off scale.
A MIC value of $\leq 1\mu \mathrm{g / mL}$ indicated that the quality control test results were acceptable.
bioMérieux included the following footnote to the QC table in the device labeling:
{7}
"The VITEK 2 Gram Negative Gentamicin does not include the full CLSI/FDA-recommended dilution ranges for QC testing with E. coli ATCC 25922 and P. aeruginosa ATCC 27853".
d. Detection limit:
Not applicable
e. Analytical Specificity:
Not applicable
f. Assay cut-off:
Not applicable
2. Comparison studies:
a. Method comparison with predicate device:
Results obtained with the bioMérieux VITEK 2 AST-Gram Negative card with Gentamicin were compared to results obtained with the CLSI broth microdilution reference panel. The following concentrations of Gentamicin are contained in the VITEK 2 AST-GN test card: 4, 8, and 32 µg/mL (equivalent standard method concentration by efficacy in µg/mL) and the reporting range is ≤ 1 – ≥ 16 µg/mL (i.e., ≤1, 2, 4, 8, and ≥16). The reference panel contained two-fold serial dilutions with a range of ≤ 0.0625 to ≥128 µg/mL. The testing conditions for the reference method consisted of the following:
- Medium – Mueller Hinton broth with appropriate dilutions of antimicrobial solution added
- Inoculum – Direct colony suspension
- Incubation – 35°C ambient air incubator; 16-20 hours
All test inocula used for the evaluation of VITEK 2 AST-GN Gentamicin and the reference method were standardized using the DensiCHEK Plus instrument. The cards were inoculated with each test organism by auto-dilution for reading by the VITEK 2 System and by manual dilution for reading on the VITEK 2 and VITEK 2 Compact Systems. Reference broth microdilution panels were inoculated in adherence with CLSI document, M07-A9.
A total of 872 clinical isolates were evaluated at three sites with VITEK 2 AST-Gram Negative cards inoculated by automatic dilution and interpreted using the VITEK 2 instrument. The majority of isolates were fresh (760 isolates, 87.1%); 113 isolates (13%) were stock isolates.
Page 8 of 12
{8}
A total of 75 challenge organisms (51 Enterobacteriaceae and 26 P. aeruginosa) were evaluated at one site. The challenge set was tested with both the auto-dilution and manual dilution options of the VITEK 2 System and with the manual dilution method on the VITEK 2 Compact System. Overall performance of the challenge organisms is shown in Table 2.
Table 2: Performance of Clinical and Challenge Isolates, VITEK 2 Auto-Dilution Method ${}^{ \ddagger }$
| Organism Group | EA Total | EA N | EA % | Eval EA Total | Eval EA N | Eval EA % | CA N | CA % | #R | Min | Maj | Vmj |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Enterobacteriaceae ≤4 (Susceptible), 8 (Intermediate), ≥16 (Resistant) | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Clinical | 725 | 720 | 99.3 | 16 | 11 | 68.8 | 719 | 99.2 | 44 | 5 | 0 | 1 |
| Challenge | 51 | 51 | 100 | 4 | 4 | 100 | 50 | 98.0 | 10 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| Combined | 776 | 771 | 99.4 | 20 | 15 | 75.0 | 769 | 99.1 | 54 | 6 | 0 | 1 |
| Pseudomonas aeruginosa ≤4 (Susceptible), 8 (Intermediate), ≥16 (Resistant) | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Clinical | 147 | 146 | 99.3 | 46 | 45 | 97.8 | 141 | 95.9 | 12 | 6 | 0 | 0 |
| Challenge | 24 | 24 | 100 | 6 | 6 | 100 | 24 | 100 | 9 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Combined | 171 | 170 | 99.4 | 52 | 51 | 98.1 | 165 | 96.5 | 21 | 6 | 0 | 0 |
| Enterobacteriaceae + Pseudomonas aeruginosa | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Clinical | 872 | 866 | 99.3 | 62 | 56 | 90.3 | 860 | 98.6 | 56 | 11 | 0 | 1 |
| Challenge | 75 | 75 | 100 | 10 | 10 | 100 | 74 | 98.7 | 19 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| Combined | 947 | 941 | 99.4 | 72 | 66 | 91.7 | 934 | 98.6 | 75 | 12 | 0 | 1 |
$^{\ddagger}$ EA - Essential Agreement (+/- 1 doubling dilution)
CA - Category Agreement
EVAL - Evaluable isolates
R - Resistant isolates
Min - Minor discrepancies
Maj - Major discrepancies
Vmj - Very major discrepancies
Essential Agreement (EA) occurs when there is agreement between the result of the reference method and that of VITEK 2 test card within plus or minus one serial two-fold dilution of the antibiotic. Evaluable results are those that are on scale for both the VITEK 2 test card and the reference method. Category Agreement (CA) occurs when the interpretation of the result of the reference method agrees exactly with the interpretation of the VITEK 2 test card.
The overall performance using the auto-dilution method of the VITEK 2 System demonstrated an essential agreement of $99.4\%$ and an overall category agreement of $98.6\%$ . There was one very major $(1.3\%)$ , 12 minor $(1.3\%)$ and no major discrepancies. The Vmj was caused by $K$ . pneumoniae.
The performance based on combined clinical and challenge data was acceptable.
There were no resistant Proteus vulgaris isolates tested in the studies. A limitation was included in the package insert:
"The ability of the VITEK 2 AST card to detect resistance with the following combination(s) is unknown because resistant strains were not available at the time of comparative testing:
Gentamicin: Proteus vulgaris"
In addition, an insufficient number of resistant isolates were tested during the comparative study for the following organisms: Citrobacter koseri (1), Enterobacter aerogenes (1), Enterobacter cloacae (2), and Serratia marcescens (1). This was addressed by adding the following limitation in the package insert:
"The ability of the VITEK 2 AST card to detect resistance with the following combination(s) is unknown because an insufficient number of resistant strains were
{9}
available at the time of comparative testing:
Gentamicin: Citrobacter koseri, Enterobacter aerogenes, Enterobacter cloacae, and Serratia marcescens"
## Challenge Data – Auto and Manual Dilution:
The challenge set of 75 isolates (51 Enterobacteriaceae and 24 Pseudomonas aeruginosa) was evaluated on the VITEK 2 System and the VITEK 2 Compact System with the manual dilution method only.
Overall performance is shown in Table 3.
Table 3: Performance of Challenge Isolates, VITEK 2 and VITEK 2 Compact-Manual Dilution
| Organism Group | EA Total | EA N | EA % | Eval EA Total | Eval EA N | Eval EA % | CA N | CA % | #R | Min | Maj | Vmj |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| VITEK 2 System | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Auto-dilution | 75 | 75 | 100 | 10 | 10 | 100 | 74 | 98.7 | 19 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| Manual dilution | 75 | 75 | 100 | 10 | 10 | 100 | 74 | 98.7 | 19 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| VITEK 2 Compact | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Manual dilution | 75 | 75 | 100 | 10 | 10 | 100 | 74 | 98.7 | 19 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
The performance of the challenge isolates using the VITEK 2 Gentamicin test on both the VITEK 2 and VITEK 2 Compact Systems was acceptable.
## MIC Trends:
The claimed Enterobacteriaceae organisms were also evaluated for trending. This trending calculation takes into account MIC values that are determined to be ≤1 and ≥1 doubling dilutions compared to the reference method irrespective whether the device MIC values are on-scale or not. The analysis showed trending was observed for Proteus spp. and K. pneumoniae. The trending analysis is shown in Tables 4.1 and 4.2:
Table 4.1: Trending Analysis of Evaluable Clinical and Challenge Results for Proteus spp.
| Gentamicin ≤1 - ≥16μg/mL | Total^{a} (Total # Tested) | Difference in MIC as Compared to the CLSI Reference Method | | | | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | ≤2 dil. lower | 1 dil. lower | Exact | 1 dil. higher | ≥2 dil. higher |
| Proteus spp. | 13 (90) | 1 | 9 | 1 (7.69%) | 2 | 0 |
| | | 10 (76.92%)^{b} 95% CI (49.74 to 91.82%) | | | 2 (15.38%)^{b} 95% CI (4.32% to 42.23%) | |
a Total number of evaluable results for trending analysis
b Difference between isolates trending lower and isolates trending higher: 61.54%; 95% CI (23.33% to 80.10%)
A lower MIC result trend was observed in with Proteus spp. compared to the CLSI broth microdilution reference method and there are concerns for potential very major
Page 10 of 12
{10}
discrepancies. This trending and the potential for occurrence of very major discrepancies for Gentamicin when testing clinical and challenge isolate results with the VITEK 2 GN Gentamicin was addressed by adding the following footnote to the performance table for Gentamicin in the device labeling (Table 127: Performance Characteristics for Gram-Negative Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing, VITEK 2 Product Information Manual).
Footnote:
"Of 90 Proteus spp. isolates tested, 13 were evaluable for trending analysis. Based on this analysis, some VITEK 2 Gentamicin MIC values tended to be at least one doubling dilution lower when compared to the reference broth microdilution."
Table 4.2: Trending Analysis of Evaluable Clinical and Challenge Results for K. pneumoniae
| Gentamicin ≤1 - ≥16μg/mL | Totala(Total # Tested) | Difference in MIC as Compared to the CLSI Reference Method | | | | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | ≤2 dil. lower | 1 dil. lower | Exact | 1 dil. higher | ≥2 dil. higher |
| K. pneumoniae | 13 (163) | 1 | 2 | 1 (7.69%) | 7 | 2 |
| | | 3 (23.08%)b95% CI (8.18% to 50.26%) | | | 9 (69.23%)b95% CI (42.37% to 87.32%) | |
a Total number of evaluable results for trending analysis
b Difference between isolates trending lower and isolates trending higher: -46.15%; 95% CI (-69.59% to -7.94%)
A higher MIC result trend was observed with $K$ pneumoniae compared to the CLSI broth microdilution reference method and there are concerns for potential major discrepancies. This trending and the potential for occurrence of major discrepancies for Gentamicin when testing clinical and challenge isolate results with the VITEK 2 GN Gentamicin was addressed by adding the following footnote to the performance table for Gentamicin in the device labeling (Table 127: Performance Characteristics for Gram-Negative Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing, VITEK 2 Product Information Manual).
Footnote:
"Of 163 K. pneumoniae isolates tested, 13 were evaluable for trending analysis. Based on this analysis, some VITEK 2 Gentamicin MIC values tended to be at least one doubling dilution higher when compared to the reference broth microdilution."
The analysis of the Pseudomonas aeruginosa MIC data did not demonstrate notable trending.
b. Matrix comparison:
Not applicable
{11}
3. Clinical studies:
Not applicable
4. Clinical cut-off:
Not applicable
5. Expected values/Reference range:
Table 5: Interpretive Criteria for Gentamicin (FDA Drug Label)
| Organism | FDA Interpretive Criteria for Gentamicin MIC (μg/mL) | | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | S | I | R |
| Enterobacteriaceae | ≤4 | 8 | ≥16 |
| Pseudomonas aeruginosa | ≤4 | 8 | ≥16 |
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.