K180621 · Sonavex, Inc. · NEU · Jun 6, 2018 · General, Plastic Surgery
Device Facts
Record ID
K180621
Device Name
EchoMark, EchoMark LP
Applicant
Sonavex, Inc.
Product Code
NEU · General, Plastic Surgery
Decision Date
Jun 6, 2018
Decision
SESE
Submission Type
Traditional
Regulation
21 CFR 878.4300
Device Class
Class 2
Indications for Use
The EchoMark and EchoMark LP are indicated for radiographic marking of sites in soft tissue. In addition, the EchoMark LP are indicated for situations where a soft tissue site needs to be marked for future medical procedures.
Device Story
EchoMark and EchoMark LP are implantable, ultrasound-visible markers used to facilitate visualization of soft tissue sites. Devices are composed of 70:30 poly(L-lactide-co-caprolactone) (PLC), a bioabsorbable polymer that resorbs in one year or more. Markers are placed into treatment sites (muscle, fat, fascia, vessels) during surgical procedures. They serve as passive imaging contrasts, allowing clinicians to visualize the site via ultrasound at later timepoints. Devices are single-use and sterile. Unlike some predicate markers, these contain no metallic components (titanium), rendering them MR safe and free of diamagnetic or ferromagnetic potential. They assist healthcare providers in identifying specific anatomical locations for follow-up procedures or monitoring.
Clinical Evidence
No human clinical data. Evidence includes bench testing (sterility, packaging, suturability, geometric analysis, in vitro degradation) and GLP animal/cadaver studies. Swine studies evaluated biocompatibility (ISO 10993), tissue marker migration, and suturability. Cadaver studies validated instructions for use and ultrasound visibility/echogenicity. Results confirmed the device is non-toxic, non-sensitizing, non-mutagenic, and non-irritating, with performance meeting all design input criteria.
Technological Characteristics
Material: 70:30 poly(L-lactide-co-caprolactone) (PLC). Sensing principle: Passive ultrasound echogenicity. Form factor: Implantable marker (low profile). Connectivity: None. Sterilization: Ethylene oxide (ISO 11135). Bioabsorption: 1 year or more. MR safety: MR safe (no metallic components).
Indications for Use
Indicated for radiographic marking of soft tissue sites and marking sites for future medical procedures in patients requiring such markers.
Regulatory Classification
Identification
An implantable clip is a clip-like device intended to connect internal tissues to aid healing. It is not absorbable.
{0}------------------------------------------------
Image /page/0/Picture/0 description: The image shows the logo of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). On the left is the Department of Health & Human Services logo. To the right of that is the FDA logo, which is a blue square with the letters "FDA" in white. To the right of the blue square is the text "U.S. FOOD & DRUG ADMINISTRATION" in blue.
June 6, 2018
Sonavex, Inc. Mr. David Narrow Chief Executive Officer 2835 O'Donnell Street. Suite 200 Baltimore, Maryland 21224
Re: K180621
Trade/Device Name: EchoMark, EchoMark LP Regulation Number: 21 CFR 878.4300 Regulation Name: Implantable Clip Regulatory Class: Class II Product Code: NEU Dated: March 7, 2018 Received: March 9, 2018
Dear Mr. Narrow:
We have reviewed your Section 510(k) premarket notification of intent to market the device referenced above and have determined the device is substantially equivalent (for the indications for use stated in the enclosure) to legally marketed predicate devices marketed in interstate commerce prior to May 28, 1976, the enactment date of the Medical Device Amendments, or to devices that have been reclassified in accordance with the provisions of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (Act) that do not require approval of a premarket approval application (PMA). You may, therefore, market the device, subject to the general controls provisions of the Act. The general controls provisions of the Act include requirements for annual registration, listing of devices, good manufacturing practice, labeling, and prohibitions against misbranding and adulteration. Please note: CDRH does not evaluate information related to contract liability warranties. We remind you, however, that device labeling must be truthful and not misleading.
If your device is classified (see above) into either class II (Special Controls) or class III (PMA), it may be subject to additional controls. Existing major regulations affecting your device can be found in the Code of Federal Regulations, Title 21, Parts 800 to 898. In addition, FDA may publish further announcements concerning your device in the Federal Register.
Please be advised that FDA's issuance of a substantial equivalence determination does not mean that FDA has made a determination that your device complies with other requirements of the Act or any Federal statutes and regulations administered by other Federal agencies. You must comply with all the Act's requirements, including, but not limited to: registration and listing (21 CFR Part 807); labeling (21 CFR Part 801); medical device reporting of medical device-related adverse events) (21 CFR 803); good manufacturing practice requirements as set forth in the quality systems (OS) regulation (21 CFR Part 820); and if applicable, the electronic product radiation control provisions (Sections 531-542 of the Act); 21 CFR 1000-1050.
{1}------------------------------------------------
Also, please note the regulation entitled, "Misbranding by reference to premarket notification" (21 CFR Part 807.97). For questions regarding the reporting of adverse events under the MDR regulation (21 CFR Part 803), please go to http://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/Safety/ReportaProblem/default.htm.
For comprehensive regulatory information about mediation-emitting products, including information about labeling regulations, please see Device Advice (https://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/DeviceRegulationandGuidance/) and CDRH Learn (http://www.fda.gov/Training/CDRHLearn). Additionally, you may contact the Division of Industry and Consumer Education (DICE) to ask a question about a specific regulatory topic. See the DICE website (http://www.fda.gov/DICE) for more information or contact DICE by email (DICE@fda.hhs.gov) or phone (1-800-638-2041 or 301-796-7100).
Sincerely,
# David Krause -S
for Binita S. Ashar, M.D., M.B.A., F.A.C.S. Director Division of Surgical Devices Office of Device Evaluation Center for Devices and Radiological Health
Enclosure
{2}------------------------------------------------
# Indications for Use
510(k) Number (if known) K180621
Device Name EchoMark and EchoMark LP
### Indications for Use (Describe)
The EchoMark and EchoMark LP are indicated for radiographic marking of sites in soft tissue.
In addition, the EchoMark LP are indicated for situations where a soft tissue site needs to be marked for future medical procedures.
Type of Use (Select one or both, as applicable)
| <span> <span style="text-decoration: overline;">X</span> Prescription Use (Part 21 CFR 801 Subpart D) </span> | <span> <span style="text-decoration: overline;">☐</span> Over-The-Counter Use (21 CFR 801 Subpart C) </span> |
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
### CONTINUE ON A SEPARATE PAGE IF NEEDED.
This section applies only to requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.
### *DO NOT SEND YOUR COMPLETED FORM TO THE PRA STAFF EMAIL ADDRESS BELOW.*
The burden time for this collection of information is estimated to average 79 hours per response, including the time to review instructions, search existing data sources, gather and maintain the data needed and complete and review the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this information collection, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to:
> Department of Health and Human Services Food and Drug Administration Office of Chief Information Officer Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) Staff PRAStaff@fda.hhs.gov
"An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB number."
{3}------------------------------------------------
### 510(k) Summary
This 510(k) summary is being submitted in accordance with the requirements of SMDA 1990 and 21 CFR 807.92.
| Date Prepared: | March 6, 2018 |
|----------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Applicant: | Sonavex, Inc.<br>2835 O'Donnell Street, Suite 200<br>Baltimore, MD 21224 |
### Primary Contact Person:
David Narrow Chief Executive Officer Sonavex, Inc. 2835 O'Donnell Street, Suite 200 Baltimore, MD 21224 Phone: (443) 862-2003 Email: dnarrow@sonavex.com
### Secondary Contact Person:
| | Devin O'Brien-Coon |
|--|----------------------------------|
| | President |
| | Sonavex, Inc. |
| | 2835 O'Donnell Street, Suite 200 |
| | Baltimore, MD 21224 |
| | Phone: (443) 625-6201 |
| | Email: dcoon@sonavex.com |
| Trade Name: | EchoMark™<br>EchoMark LP™ |
|------------------------|-----------------------------------|
| Common Name: | Implantable Radiographic Marker |
| Classification Name: | Implantable Clip, 21 CFR 878.4300 |
| Device Classification: | Class II |
| Product Code: | NEU |
#### Predicate Device: K152070, BioZorb LP Marker Reference Device: K112267, Polyganics Neurolac Nerve Guide
### Substantially Equivalent to:
The EchoMark and EchoMark LP are substantially equivalent in intended use, principle of operation and technological characteristics to the BioZorb LP Marker cleared under premarket notification K152070.
### Description of the Device Subject to Premarket Notification:
The EchoMark and EchoMark LP are implantable ultrasound-visible markers used to facilitate visualization of a soft tissue site. The EchoMark and EchoMark LP are
{4}------------------------------------------------
comprised of 70:30 poly(L-lactide-co-caprolactone) (PLC) which resorbs completely in one year or more. The EchoMark LP (low profile) is identical but smaller in size than the EchoMark. Both have identical performance and technological characteristics. The EchoMark and EchoMark LP are provided sterile and are single use devices. The EchoMark material is entirely polymeric and therefore has no clinically relevant diamagnetic or ferromagnetic potential. This device is MR safe.
### Indications for Use:
The EchoMark and EchoMark LP are indicated for radiographic marking of sites in soft tissue. In addition, the EchoMark and EchoMark LP are indicated for situations where a soft tissue site needs to be marked for future medical procedures.
### Technical Characteristics Compared to Predicate Device:
The proposed predicate device for the EchoMark and EchoMark LP is the BioZorb LP Marker (K152070) manufactured by Focal Therapeutics. Sonavex has identified BioZorb LP as the predicate device because the devices share the same indications for use and identical or similar technological characteristics including principles of operation, compatibility with ultrasound, device size, polymeric materials, bioabsorption time and sterilization method.
Sonavex also used a reference device to support the material of the EchoMark and EchoMark LP which allows FDA to evaluate the proposed scientific methods for assessing this type of device material in a similar anatomic space (in addition to ISO 10993 biocompatibility testing). The reference device also shares certain technological similarities. The Neurolac Nerve Guide (Polyganics BV; K112267) is made from poly(lactide-co-caprolactone), which is the same material as the EchoMark and EchoMark LP. The Neurolac is also of similar size and is placed in surgical sites.
The EchoMark and EchoMark LP are indicated for radiographic marking of sites in soft tissue. The BioZorb LP Marker is also indicated for radiographic marking of sites in soft tissue. The EchoMark and EchoMark LP and the BioZorb LP are indicated for situations where the soft tissue site needs to be marked for future medical procedures. The markers are each positioned into a treatment site during a procedure and serve as passive imaging contrasts to the surrounding tissue for the purposes for radiographic visualization of the site at a later timepoint.
The BioZorb LP Marker and EchoMark LP are designed to mark treatment sites in soft tissue, which typically contains some combination of muscle, fat, fascia, and vessels. Anatomical treatment sites are identical.
The difference in indications for use between the EchoMark/EchoMark LP and BioZorb LP predicate does not constitute indications that create a new intended use. The EchoMark and EchoMark LP have the same intended use.
Technological characteristics between the EchoMark/EchoMark LP and the BioZorb LP are similar with some differences which were addressed with performance data. Differences include visualization compatibility as both the EchoMark LP and BioZorb LP Markers are radiographically visible markers composed of a bioabsorbable material, however, the BioZorb LP Marker also contains permanent titanium components that offer visibility under X-ray, CT, and MRI. The EchoMark/EchoMark LP
{5}------------------------------------------------
does not contain the titanium clips, and is intended to be visualized by ultrasound, a subset of the radiographic modalities available. Performance data was provided which evaluated this difference and found it did not impact substantial equivalence.
Both the EchoMark/EchoMark LP and the BioZorb LP Marker are low profile but there are differences in shape. Performance data was provided which addressed this difference and found that it did not impact substantial equivalence.
The EchoMark and EchoMark LP are radiographically visible markers composed solely of a bioabsorbable polymer: poly-lactide-co-caprolactone. The BioZorb LP Marker is a radiographically visible marker composed of a bioabsorbable poly-lactide polymer that has similar technological characteristics. The BioZorb LP Marker is made from the same lactide polymer without caprolactone. To establish equivalency of the device materials, a reference device, Polyganics' Neurolac Nerve Guide (K112267) was selected. The EchoMark/EchoMark LP and reference product, Neurolac Nerve Guide, are both made of poly-lactide-co-caprolactone.
The EchoMark/EchoMark LP and BioZorb LP Marker degrade within 1 year or more. Performance testing was completed to confirm bioabsorption time compared to the predicate device. The EchoMark LP is sterilized via ethylene oxide and BioZorb LP Marker is sterilized via gamma irradiation. Testing for ethylene oxide residuals has been performed and shows that residuals do not exceed acceptable limits.
The provided comparison of the specifications and associated device testing demonstrates the functional equivalence of the products. The differences discussed do not raise new issues of safety and effectiveness.
Therefore, the EchoMark and EchoMark LP are substantially equivalent to the predicate device.
### Safety and Performance Data:
All necessary testing has been performed for the EchoMark and EchoMark LP to assure substantial equivalence to the predicate device and reference material and demonstrate that the device performs as intended.
The following ISO 10993 biocompatibility and safety testing was performed on the EchoMark device. Results from the tests indicate that the device is non-toxic, nonsensitizing, non-mutagenic and non-irritating therefore biocompatible for its intended use:
- Cytotoxicity
- Sensitization
- Irritation/ Intracutaneous Reactivity
- Acute Systemic Toxicity
- Pvrogenicitv
- Genotoxicity
- Subacute/Subchronic Toxicity with Histologic Evaluation to confirm Safety (GLP Swine Testing)
{6}------------------------------------------------
Performance testing, Bench: Successful completion of the following tests confirmed that risk controls were properly implemented, and design outputs meet design inputs and device is suitable for its intended use:
- ISO 11135 Sterility testing validated to SAL of 10-6
- ISO 11607-1 Packaging validation distribution simulation
- Bench Suturability and Suture Retention
- Labeling verification
- Geometric analysis of EchoMark and EchoMark LP ।
- In vitro EchoMark and EchoMark LP degradation study
Performance testing, Animal (GLP Swine) and Cadaver:
- Ultrasound Visibility and Orientation Verification
- Ultrasound Echogenicity
- Ultrasound Accelerated Aging Echogenicity
- Suturability Timing Study ၊
- Tissue Marker Migration Study
- Instructions for Use Validation in Cadaver ı
The EchoMark and EchoMark LP met all specified criteria and did not raise new safety or performance questions and therefore support a finding of substantial equivalence.
## Basis for Determination of Substantial Equivalence:
The Indication/Intended Use and the fundamental scientific technology of the EchoMark and EchoMark LP devices have been determined to be substantially equivalent to the predicate device.
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.