K193192 · International Medical Industries, Inc. · FMF · Jan 31, 2020 · General Hospital
Device Facts
Record ID
K193192
Device Name
Tamper Evident Cap
Applicant
International Medical Industries, Inc.
Product Code
FMF · General Hospital
Decision Date
Jan 31, 2020
Decision
SESE
Submission Type
Special
Regulation
21 CFR 880.5860
Device Class
Class 2
Indications for Use
Tamper Evident Caps are indicated for use as a sterile tamper evident cap for IV syringes.
Device Story
Prep-Lock Tamper Evident Cap is a sterile, single-use device designed to cover male luer ports on IV syringes. It provides visual evidence of access by separating upon opening. The device is manufactured from polystyrene and polypropylene resin. It is intended for use in clinical settings where IV syringes are prepared or stored. The healthcare provider applies the cap to the luer port; the cap remains in place until the user removes it, which breaks the tamper-evident seal. This provides assurance to the clinician that the syringe contents have not been accessed or compromised prior to use, enhancing patient safety by preventing unauthorized access to IV medications.
Clinical Evidence
No clinical data. Bench testing only, including sterility assurance (ANSI/AAMI/ISO 11737-2), packaging integrity (ASTM F1886, ASTM F88, ASTM F1929), shelf life (ASTM F1980-16), and device function (ISO 80369-7, internal break force/simulated use tests).
Technological Characteristics
Materials: Polypropylene and polystyrene resin. Design: Tamper-evident cap for male luer ports. Sterilization: Ethylene Oxide (EO) to 10^-6 SAL. Standards: ISO 10993-1 (biocompatibility), ISO 80369-7 (connectors), ASTM F1980-16 (aging), ASTM F1886/F88/F1929 (packaging). Connectivity: None. Energy source: None (mechanical).
Indications for Use
Indicated for use as a sterile tamper evident cap for IV syringes.
Regulatory Classification
Identification
A piston syringe is a device intended for medical purposes that consists of a calibrated hollow barrel and a movable plunger. At one end of the barrel there is a male connector (nozzle) for fitting the female connector (hub) of a hypodermic single lumen needle. The device is used to inject fluids into, or withdraw fluids from, the body.
Predicate Devices
Prep-Lock™ Tamper Evident Cap for IV Syringes (K861276)
Submission Summary (Full Text)
{0}------------------------------------------------
Image /page/0/Picture/0 description: The image contains the logo of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The logo consists of two parts: the Department of Health & Human Services logo on the left and the FDA acronym along with the full name of the agency on the right. The FDA part of the logo is in blue, with the acronym in a square and the full name, "U.S. Food & Drug Administration," written out next to it.
January 31, 2020
International Medical Industries Inc. David Meily Director of Quality & Regulatory Affairs 2981 Gateway Drive Pompano Beach, Florida 33069
#### Re: K193192
Trade/Device Name: Tamper Evident Cap Regulation Number: 21 CFR 880.5860 Regulation Name: Piston Syringe Regulatory Class: Class II Product Code: FMF Dated: January 7, 2019 Received: January 8, 2019
#### Dear David Meily:
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, 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
{1}------------------------------------------------
801); medical device 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 mediation-emitting products, including information about labeling regulations, please see Device Advice (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,
For CAPT Alan Stevens Assistant Director DHT3C: Division of Drug Delivery and General Hospital Devices. and Human Factors OHT3: Office of Gastrorenal, ObGyn, General Hospital and Urology Devices Office of Product Evaluation and Quality Center for Devices and Radiological Health
Enclosure
{2}------------------------------------------------
# Indications for Use
510(k) Number (if known) K193192
Device Name
Prep-LockTM Tamper Evident Cap for IV Syringes
Indications for Use (Describe) Tamper Evident Caps are indicated for use as a sterile tamper evident cap for IV syringes.
Type of Use (Select one or both, as applicable)
X Prescription Use (Part 21 CFR 801 Subpart D)
| 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}------------------------------------------------
# K193192 510(k) Summary
| Date Summary Prepared: | November 15, 2019 |
|--------------------------|--------------------------------------------------|
| Manufacturing Company: | International Medical Industries, Inc. |
| Manufacturing Address: | 2981 Gateway Drive, Pompano Beach, Florida 33069 |
| Corresponding Official: | David Meily |
| | Director of Quality and Regulatory Affairs |
| Telephone Number: | 954.917.9570 x 283 |
| Fax Number: | 954.917.9244 |
| Email Address: | dmeily@imiweb.com |
| Trade Name: | Prep-Lock™ Tamper Evident Cap |
| | for IV Syringes |
| Device 510(k): | K193192 |
| Device Common Name: | Tamper Evident Cap |
| Regulation Number: | 21 CFR 880.5860 |
| Regulation Name: | Piston syringe |
| Product Class: | II |
| Product Panel: | General Hospital |
| Product Code: | FMF |
| Predicate Device Name: | Prep-Lock™ Tamper Evident Cap |
| | for IV Syringes |
| | (Originally cleared as Tamper Proof Cap) |
| Predicate Device 510(k): | K861276 cleared May 5, 1986 |
| Device Common Name: | Tamper Evident Cap |
| Regulation Number: | 21 CFR 880.5860 |
| Regulation Name: | Piston syringe |
| Product Class: | II |
| Product Panel: | General Hospital |
| Product Code: | FMF |
#### 1. Device Description
The Tamper Evident Cap (TEC) is a sterile, single use device which will be used to cover male luer ports on medical devices and provide evidence of access. TEC is offered in multiple colors and all the components used in the device are comprised of polystyrene and polypropylene resin. The TEC device is marketed as a stand-alone device and packaged in bulk.
{4}------------------------------------------------
## 2. Indications for Use
| Subject Device IFU: | Predicate Device IFU |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| TEC in Bulk Bags<br>Tamper Evident Caps are indicated for use<br>as a sterile tamper evident cap for IV<br>syringes. | TEC in Individual Trays and Blister Packs<br>Tamper Evident Caps are indicated for use<br>as a sterile tamper evident cap for IV<br>syringes. |
Discussion of differences in indications for use
The Indications For Use remains the same.
## 3. Comparison of Technological Characteristics and Basis for Substantial Equivalence
| Parameter | Subject Device | Predicate Device | Comparison |
|----------------------------|--------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Proprietary<br>Device Name | Prep-Lock™ Tamper Evident Cap<br>for IV Syringes | Prep-Lock™ Tamper<br>Evident Cap for IV Syringes | Same |
| Packaging<br>Configuration | Pouches that contain 100 TEC<br>units. | Individual blister packs and<br>10-up trays. | The packaging<br>configuration has been<br>tested and conforms to<br>the same functional and<br>sterility specifications as<br>the predicate device. The<br>cap itself is unchanged. |
| Labeling | Instructions on how to open 100<br>cap packaging | Instructions on how to<br>open 10 cap packaging | Labeling has been slightly<br>modified on how to open<br>the new packaging |
| Sterility | Sterile EO (10^-6) | Sterile EO (10^-6) | Same |
| Number of<br>Uses | Single Use, Rx only | Single Use, Rx only | Same |
| Cap Material | Polypropylene / Polystyrene | Polypropylene /<br>Polystyrene | Same |
| Shelf Life | 3 years | 3 years | Same |
| Table 5.3.1 - Comparison Between Subject and Predicate Devices | | |
|----------------------------------------------------------------|--|--|
| | | |
{5}------------------------------------------------
| Tamper<br>Evidence<br>Design Feature | Cap separation upon opening | Cap separation upon<br>opening | Same |
|--------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------|------|
| Biocompatibili<br>ty Contact /<br>Duration | Indirect blood contact, limited<br>duration. | Indirect blood contact,<br>limited duration. | Same |
# Discussion of Technological differences
The device is a tamper evident cap used to cover male luer ports on medical devices and provide evidence of access. The device is marketed as a stand-alone device and packaged in bulk. Both the subject device and the predicate device are comprised of the same resin and are manufactured by the same injection molding / assembly process. There are no changes in the cap from the currently marketed predicate device and the subject device. The update is in the packaging configuration in which the caps are provided. The subject device is provided in a new packaging configuration; a carton containing 10 pouches where each pouch contains 100 TEC units. The predicate device was offered in 10-up trays and single unit blisters. The instructions for use have been updated to provide slight modifications to the instructions on how to open the new packaging.
The safety and effectiveness of the proposed TEC device is adequately supported by the material information, comparison of design characteristics with the predicate device, testing rationale and data summarized within this premarket notification. This testing supports the equivalence of the TEC in bulk packaging to the predicate TEC device and shows that no new questions of safety and effectiveness have been introduced with the packaging modification.
# 4. Non-Clinical Bench Testing
The new packaging configuration was assessed and the following performance testing was conducted. Packaging design verification and validation were performed to ensure that the subject TEC device in bulk packaging meets the existing functional specifications and demonstrates equivalence to the predicate device packaging. A summary of the testing conducted is presented below. All pre-determined acceptance criteria were met. The data demonstrates that the subject device is substantially equivalent to the predicate device.
| Test Name | Test Description |
|--------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Sterility Assurance 10-6 SAL | Sterilization product adoption for Tamper evident cap<br>in Tyvek Pouch (Bulk Bag) conducted per ANSI/AAMI/<br>ISO 11737-2: 2009/(R)2014 Sterilization of medical<br>devices – Microbiological methods – Part 2: Tests of<br>sterility performed in the definition, validation and<br>maintenance of a sterilization process |
| Sterilization Product Adoption | AAMI TIR 28 Product adoption<br>and process equivalence<br>for ethylene oxide sterilization |
| Table 5.4.1 – Summary of Performance Testing Conducted on Subject Device | | |
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------|--|--|
| | | |
{6}------------------------------------------------
| Shelf Life | ASTM F1980-16 Standard Guide for<br>Accelerated Aging of Sterile Barrier Systems for Medical<br>Devices1 |
|---------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| EO/ECH Residuals | ISO 10993-1 Biological evaluation of medical devices -<br>Part 1: Evaluation and testing within a risk management<br>process |
| Device Function | AAMI ANSI HE75 Human factors engineering—Design of<br>medical devices<br>ISO 80369-7 Small-bore connectors for liquids and<br>gases in healthcare applications – Connectors for<br>intravascular or hypodermic applications<br>Tamper Evident Break Force Test Method (IMI Internal)<br>Simulated Use Test Method (IMI Internal)<br>Weld Strength (IMI Internal) |
| Packaging Integrity | Standard Test Method for Determining Integrity of<br>Seals for Flexible Packaging by Visual Inspection (ASTM<br>F 1886) |
| Transportation | Minimum Peel Strength (ASTM F 88) |
| Transportation | ISTA 3B TEST Over 150 lbs. Pallet Test,<br>Visual on Seal per ASTM F1886, Dye Penetration per<br>F1929, |
| Product Validation | Human factors and Usability, limited to assessment of<br>packaging use. |
## Biocompatibility Testinq
The packaging material for the subject and predicate devices have no patient contact. Biocompatibility testing of the TEC device was conducted per Guidance Document "Use of International Standard ISO 10993-1, "Biological evaluation of medical devices – Part 1: Evaluation and testing within a risk management process"; Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff, Jun 16, 2016 and "Guidance for Industry and FDA Staff - Intravascular Administration Sets Premarket Notification Submissions [510(k)]," July 11, 2008, as recognized by the FDA. Biocompatibility testing was conducted in accordance with the cited guidance and standards as required for an External Communicating Device, Blood Path, Indirect Contact, Limited Duration.
## 5. Clinical Bench Testing
Not applicable for this change.
## 6. Conclusion
Review of the performance test summaries as well as comparison of the device classification, indications for use, operating principle, technological characteristics, sterility, and biocompatibility demonstrate that the subject device, Tamper Evident Cap in the bulk bag configuration is substantially equivalent to the predicate Tamper Evident Cap in single and 10up packaging configurations. The difference between the subject and the predicate devices do not raise any new questions of safety or effectiveness.
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.