K191878 · Dex Surgical · GEI · Jan 29, 2021 · General, Plastic Surgery
Device Facts
Record ID
K191878
Device Name
DEX Device
Applicant
Dex Surgical
Product Code
GEI · General, Plastic Surgery
Decision Date
Jan 29, 2021
Decision
SESE
Submission Type
Traditional
Regulation
21 CFR 878.4400
Device Class
Class 2
Attributes
Therapeutic
Indications for Use
The DEX device laparoscopic instruments have application in a variety of minimally invasive procedures to facilitate grasping, mobilization, dissection, suturing, transection and electro-cauterization of tissues.
Device Story
DEX Device is an electro-mechanical laparoscopic instrument system for minimally invasive surgery. It consists of a control handle, interchangeable arms (scissors, needle holder, forceps, hook), and a console hosting software and power unit. The surgeon operates the device manually within the sterile field, similar to traditional laparoscopic instruments. The control handle features an ergonomic hand piece with command buttons to actuate distal tip movements (tilt, rotate, open-close) via electromechanical control. For electrocautery, the device connects to a standard ESU (IEC 60601-2-2) via a monopolar cable, with the surgeon controlling the effect via an ESU foot pedal. The system facilitates tissue manipulation and cauterization, providing the surgeon with enhanced distal articulation controlled by wrist and finger movements. The device is reusable and autoclavable, intended to improve surgical precision and efficiency during laparoscopic procedures.
Clinical Evidence
No clinical studies were conducted. Evidence consists of bench testing, including biocompatibility (ISO 10993), electrical safety/EMC, reliability testing of components (needle holder, scissors, grasper, motors), shaft insulation, and thermal spread analysis. Thermal spread was compared to the predicate using histomorphometric analysis on fresh tissues, showing equivalent characteristics. Simulated use testing involved 40 cycles of tissue interaction, cauterization, cleaning, and autoclave, confirming no damage or corrosion. Usability was assessed per IEC 60601-1-6.
Technological Characteristics
Hand-held electromechanical laparoscopic instrument. Materials: stainless steel (ASTM F138, ASTM F1058, ASTM F899-12b, ISO 7153-1). Energy: Monopolar electrosurgery (compatible with IEC 60601-2-2 ESUs). Connectivity: Wired connection to console and ESU. Sterilization: Steam autoclavable. Software: Embedded control for motorized distal articulation. Dimensions: 8-10 mm diameter.
Indications for Use
Indicated for use in minimally invasive laparoscopic procedures for grasping, mobilization, dissection, suturing, transection, and electro-cauterization of tissues in patients requiring such surgical interventions.
Regulatory Classification
Identification
An electrosurgical cutting and coagulation device and accessories is a device intended to remove tissue and control bleeding by use of high-frequency electrical current.
{0}------------------------------------------------
Image /page/0/Picture/0 description: The image contains two logos. On the left is the Department of Health & Human Services logo. On the right is the FDA logo, which includes the letters "FDA" in a blue square, followed by the words "U.S. FOOD & DRUG ADMINISTRATION" in blue text.
January 29, 2021
Dex Surgical Guillaume Noury CEO 3 Rue Des Petits Ruisseaux Verrieres Le Buisson, 91370 France
Re: K191878
Trade/Device Name: DEX Device Regulation Number: 21 CFR 878.4400 Regulation Name: Electrosurgical Cutting and Coagulation Device and Accessories Regulatory Class: Class II Product Code: GEI Dated: December 28, 2020 Received: December 28, 2020
Dear Guillaume Noury:
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. Although this letter refers to your product as a device, please be aware that some cleared products may instead be combination products. The 510(k) Premarket Notification Database located at https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfpmn/pmn.cfm identifies combination product submissions. The general controls provisions of the Act include requirements for annual registration, listing of devices, good manufacturing practice, labeling, 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
{1}------------------------------------------------
801); medical device reporting (reporting of medical device-related adverse events) (21 CFR 803) for devices or postmarketing safety reporting (21 CFR 4, Subpart B) for combination products (see https://www.fda.gov/combination-products/guidance-regulatory-information/postmarketing-safety-reportingcombination-products); good manufacturing practice requirements as set forth in the quality systems (QS) regulation (21 CFR Part 820) for devices or current good manufacturing practices (21 CFR 4, Subpart A) for combination products; and, if applicable, the electronic product radiation control provisions (Sections 531-542 of the Act); 21 CFR 1000-1050.
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 https://www.fda.gov/medical-device-safety/medical-device-reportingmdr-how-report-medical-device-problems.
For comprehensive regulatory information about medical devices and radiation-emitting products, including information about labeling regulations, please see Device (https://www.fda.gov/medicaldevices/device-advice-comprehensive-regulatory-assistance)and CDRH Learn (https://www.fda.gov/training-and-continuing-education/cdrh-learn). 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 (https://www.fda.gov/medical-device-advice-comprehensive-regulatoryassistance/contact-us-division-industry-and-consumer-education-dice) for more information or contact DICE by email (DICE@fda.hhs.gov) or phone (1-800-638-2041 or 301-796-7100).
Sincerely,
Long Chen, Ph.D. Assistant Director DHT4A: Division of General Surgery Devices OHT4: Office of Surgical and Infection Control Devices Office of Product Evaluation and Quality Center for Devices and Radiological Health
Enclosure
{2}------------------------------------------------
## Indications for Use
510(k) Number (if known) K191878
Device Name DEX Device
#### Indications for Use (Describe)
The DEX device laparoscopic instruments have application in a variety of minimally invasive procedures to facilitate grasping, mobilization, dissection, suturing, transection and electro-cauterization of tissues.
| Type of Use (Select one or both, as applicable) | |
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| <span style="text-decoration: overline;">☑</span> Prescription Use (Part 21 CFR 801 Subpart D) | <span style="text-decoration: overline;">☐</span> Over-The-Counter Use (21 CFR 801 Subpart C) |
### 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
## I. SUBMITTER
Dex Surgical 3 rue des petits ruisseaux 91370 VERRIERES LE BUISSON FRANCE
Contact person : Guillaume Noury
Date prepared 27 january, 2021
## II. DEVICE
Trade Name : DEX Device Common name : Articulated Laparoscopic Instruments Classification Name : Endoscopic instruments and Accessories` CFR section : 878.4400 Regulatory Class : II Product Code : Classification product code: GEI
### III. PREDICATE DEVICE
Predicate device used : K061425, Pure wrist A reference device has been used : K173919, HX device
### IV. DEVICE DESCRIPTION
The DEX Device consists of an electro-mechanical system designed for surgeon to perform minimal invasive surgeries: laparoscopic surgery. The surgeon will use the system in a similar way than any laparoscopic instruments and remains in contact with the patient. The surgeon will positioned himself like in any classic laparoscopic procedure, standing in the sterile field close to the patient: Same installation, trocars,
{4}------------------------------------------------
endoscopic camera, suction, ESU for monopolar, needles, operating table, instruments, procedure.
The device consists of a Control handle and different Arms (instruments); and accessories. The Console hosts the software and the power unit. The control handle is comprised of an ergonomic hand piece that can turn on its own axis thanks to the comfort joint. The control handle has command buttons that activate the different degrees of freedom or the Arm. Different arms can be connected on the control handle.
Arms consists in a distal articulation that allows the tip (scissors, needle holder, forceps or Hook) to tilt, rotate and open-close. The arms and the control handle are reusable and autoclavable. The scissors, the dissector (Maryland) and the hook supports electrocautery monopolar energy after connecting the standard monopolar cable between DEX device and an ESU compliant with IEC 60601-2-2; After installed the neutral electrode; The user can control the cautery effect by pressing on the foot pedal switch provided with the ESU.
Associated acessories includes : sleeves
## V. INDICATION FOR USE
The DEX device laparoscopic instruments have application in a variety of minimally invasive procedures to facilitate grasping, mobilization, dissection, suturing, transection and electro-cauterization of tissues.
# VI. COMPARISON OF TECHNOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS WITH THE PREDICATE DEVICE
DEX Surgical believes that the DEX device has the similar intended use and indications for use as the predicate. The instruments principles of operation and functionality characteristics are similar. Both devices are Hand Held, with a range of different instruments with multiple distal mobility and have application in a variety of minimally invasive procedures to facilitate grasping, mobilization, dissection and transection of tissues. Like the predicate DEX device, intended to be used in laparoscopic surgery, by laparoscopic surgeons for manipulation soft tissues. The surgical procedure stills the
{5}------------------------------------------------
same with DEX than classical laparoscopy. DEX is inserted through a trocar to assist in laparoscopic procedures.
Like the predicate DEX device is an active electrode compatible to be used with an HF generator compliant with IEC 60601-2-2. Both device equipped with monopolar cautery connection and can be used to cauterize tissues when the instrument is attached to standard cautery cable, neutral electrode and electrosurgical unit.
Summary of the same technological elements:
- Hand held laparoscopic instrument
- . Range of instruments: dissector, scissors, needle holder, hook
- Inserted threw trocars, same installation
- . Distal mobility of the tip
- . Wrist and finger control of the distal movement
- . Monopolar active electrode when connected to an ESU with a 4 mm cable socket
The following difference exists between the subject and the predicate device.
- . Diameter of the instrument 8-10 mm
- . Reusable and autoclavable
- . Electromechanical control of the movement
- Sleeve (tip cover)
The reference device and DEX device are both laparoscopic hand held devices too; the surgeon is in the same position than with any laparoscopic device. Both devices are "co-manipulated devices" and have an articulation at the tip of the instruments that is commanded by the surgeon's wrist and/or the surgeon's fingers. Both devices use software to allow a motorized motion of tip and have an electromechanical control of the movement
{6}------------------------------------------------
## VII. Performance data
The following performance data were provided in support of the substantial equivalence determination
## Biocompatibility testing
The aim of this biological evaluation is to provide the biological safety of the DEX Device. It was done according to:
- Standard ISO 10993-1: 2018 "Biological evaluation of medical devices",
- Other standards of the 10993 series, and
- FDA Guidance for Industry and FDA Staff "Use of International Standard ISO 10993-
1, Biological evaluation of medical devices - Part 1: Evaluation and testing within a risk management process", issued on June 2016.
The following tests have been conducted:
- Cytotoxicity .
- . Sensitization
- . Irritation
- Systemic toxicity
- . Pyrogenecity
The DEX device is considered tissue contacting for a duration of less that 24 hours.
A large majority of materials of the applied part have been chosen from the stainless material standards for surgical instrumentation:
- . ASTM F138
- ASTM F1058 .
- . ASTM F899-12b
- ISO 7153-1: Surgical instruments -- Materials -- Part 1: Metals •
## Electrical safety and electromagnetic compatibility (EMC)
Electrical Safety and EMC testing were conducted on DEX device. Tested and validated by an independent laboratory, in compliance with IEC 60601-1:2012 and IEC 60601-2-2: 2017.
Electromagnetic compatibility was tested and validated by an independent laboratory, in compliance with IEC 60601-1-2 Ed4.0 (2014).
{7}------------------------------------------------
## Bench test
- > Needle Holder reliability evaluation
- > Scissor reliability evaluation
- > Grasper reliability evaluation
- > Control handle and motors reliability evaluation
- > Sleeves reliability evaluation
- > Shaft Insulation
- > System testing : monopolar energy (animal test)
- > Shaft insulation
- > Thermal spread of Dex device vs Predicate device
- > Transport and packaging testing
The durability and the safety of DEX device were evaluated with different tests in real conditions or in simulated conditions. These studies demonstrate that the DEX device can be safely used for the intended use defined.
## Cleaning and sterilization validation, reprocessing
Steam sterilization was tested and validated by an independent laboratory, in compliance with ISO 17664 – ISO 17665 Standards and AAMI TIR 12 Technical Report. Cleaning procedures were tested and validated by an independent laboratory followinq AAMI TIR12 and AAMI TIR30.
### Software validation
The software validation activities were performed in accordance with the FDA Guidance, "Guidance for the Content of Premarket Submissions for Software Contained in Medical Devices" (May 11, 2005) and IEC 62304:2006 (First Edition) + A1:2015 Medical device software - Software life cycle processes.
### Clinical study
No clinical studies have been conducted.
## Usability
The DEX Device usability was assessed and found to be safe and effective for its intended uses, by the intended users, in its intended use environment.
ACCORDING TO THE STANDARDS IEC 60601-1-6:2010 (Third Edition) + A1:2013 and EN 60601-1-6:2010 +A1:2015.
{8}------------------------------------------------
## Thermal effect
Thermal Spread of DEX monopolar arm has been compared to the predicate device. The DEX device thermal effect in monopolar mode is equivalent to the thermal effect of the predicate device. The effect on different types of tissues gives comparable affected surface with usual and identical settings when use with a legally marketed ESU. Histomorphometric analysis on fresh tissues demonstrated the same characteristics of thermal spread in monopolar mode (CUT and COAG) between Dex Device and the Predicate Device.
## Simulated use
DEX invasive parts have performed 40 simulated uses including fresh tissues interactions, cauterization, cleaning, lubrication and autoclave for each cycle. DEX device monopolar arms after have successfully passed the 40 simulated uses: No damage, cracks, corrosion and associated risks have been identified after the whole 40 cycles tested.
## VIII. Conclusion
The DEX Device has the same intended use than the predicate device. The features comparison review of the subject device and the tests provided show that the technological differences between the DEX Device and the predicate devices do not raise any new question of safety and effectiveness.
The whole performance data analysis demonstrates that the subject device performs as intended and that it is 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.