K213426 · Instrumentation Laboratory CO · GJS · Aug 16, 2022 · Hematology
Device Facts
Record ID
K213426
Device Name
HemosIL ReadiPlasTin
Applicant
Instrumentation Laboratory CO
Product Code
GJS · Hematology
Decision Date
Aug 16, 2022
Decision
SESE
Submission Type
Traditional
Regulation
21 CFR 864.7750
Device Class
Class 2
Indications for Use
HemosIL ReadiPlasTin is an in vitro diagnostic thromboplastin reagent, based on recombinant human tissue factor, for the quantitative determination, in human citrated plasma, of Prothrombin Time (PT) and Fibrinogen, on the ACL TOP Family and ACL TOP Family 50 Series of analyzers. The product is intended to be used for the extrinsic coagulation pathway and the monitoring of Oral Vitamin K Antagonist Therapy.
Device Story
HemosIL ReadiPlasTin is an in vitro diagnostic reagent kit containing recombinant human tissue factor in a synthetic phospholipid blend. Used on ACL TOP Family and ACL TOP Family 50 Series analyzers; the device initiates the extrinsic coagulation pathway in citrated plasma samples upon addition of calcium ions. The analyzer measures light-scatter or absorbance during clot formation to quantify PT and fibrinogen levels. Results are used by clinicians to monitor patients on Oral Vitamin K Antagonist Therapy and evaluate coagulation status. The current submission introduces EDTA as a stabilizer and removes inactive filler ingredients (bovine gamma globulin and trehalose) from the liquid reagent formulation. The device is intended for professional use in clinical laboratory settings.
Clinical Evidence
Bench testing only. Precision/reproducibility studies (20 days, N=80 per sample) met acceptance criteria. Linearity confirmed for fibrinogen (60-700 mg/dL) and extrinsic factors. Interference testing performed for heparin, hemoglobin, triglycerides, bilirubin, and daptomycin. Method comparison against RecombiPlasTin 2G (N=160) showed high correlation (r > 0.99). No clinical studies performed.
Technological Characteristics
Reagent: Recombinant human tissue factor, synthetic phospholipids, 0.5 mM EDTA, preservative, buffer. Diluent: Calcium chloride, polybrene, preservative. Coagulometric sensing principle. Quantitative measurement. Compatible with ACL TOP Family and ACL TOP Family 50 Series analyzers. Sterilization: Not specified. Connectivity: Instrument-integrated.
Indications for Use
Indicated for quantitative determination of Prothrombin Time (PT) and Fibrinogen in human citrated plasma for evaluation of the extrinsic coagulation pathway and monitoring of Oral Vitamin K Antagonist Therapy.
Regulatory Classification
Identification
A prothrombin time test is a device used as a general screening procedure for the detection of possible clotting factor deficiencies in the extrinsic coagulation pathway, which involves the reaction between coagulation factors III and VII, and to monitor patients receiving coumarin therapy (the administration of one of the coumarin anticoagulants in the treatment of venous thrombosis or pulmonary embolism).
{0}
K213426 - Page 1 of 12
# 510(k) SUBSTANTIAL EQUIVALENCE DETERMINATION DECISION SUMMARY
## I Background Information:
A 510(k) Number
K213426
B Applicant
Instrumentation Laboratory Co.
C Proprietary and Established Names
HemosIL ReadiPlasTin
D Regulatory Information
| Product Code(s) | Classification | Regulation Section | Panel |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| GJS | Class II | 21 CFR 864.7750 - Prothrombin Time Test | HE - Hematology |
| GIS | Class II | 21 CFR 864.7340 – Fibrinogen determination system | HE- Hematology |
## II Submission/Device Overview:
A Purpose for Submission:
Formulation change to the HemosIL ReadiPlasTin reagent due to stability issues
B Measurand:
Prothrombin Time (PT)
Fibrinogen PT derived
C Type of Test:
Quantitative
## III Intended Use/Indications for Use:
A Intended Use(s):
{1}
See Indications for Use below.
## B Indication(s) for Use:
HemosIL ReadiPlasTin is an in vitro diagnostic thromboplastin reagent, based on recombinant human tissue factor, for the quantitative determination, in human citrated plasma, of Prothrombin Time (PT) and Fibrinogen, on the ACL TOP Family and ACL TOP Family 50 Series of analyzers.
The product is intended to be used for the evaluation of the extrinsic coagulation pathway and the monitoring of Oral Vitamin K Antagonist Therapy.
## C Special Conditions for Use Statement(s):
Rx - For Prescription Use Only
For in vitro diagnostis use.
## D Special Instrument Requirements:
ACL TOP Family Analyzer (K160276)
ACL TOP Family 50 Series of Analyzer (K150877)
## IV Device/System Characteristics:
### A Device Description:
The HemosIL ReadiPlasTin kit contains the HemosIL ReadiplasTin Reagent and HemosIL ReadiPlasTin Diluent. The HemosIL ReadiPlasTin Reagent is a tissue thromboplastin reagent, and the Diluent is a liposomal preparation that contains recombinant human tissue factor (RTF), re-lipidated in a synthetic phospholipid blend.
### B Principle of Operation:
In the Prothrombin Time (PT) test, the addition of the tissue thromboplastin (ReadiPlasTin reagent) to the patient citrated plasma in the presence of calcium ions initiates the activation of the extrinsic pathway. This ultimately results in the conversion of fibrinogen to fibrin, with formation of a solid gel. Fibrinogen results are quantitated (PT-based method) by relating the absorbance or light-scatter during clotting to a calibrator.
## V Substantial Equivalence Information:
### A Predicate Device Name(s):
Hemosil Readiplas Tin
### B Predicate 510(k) Number(s):
K122584
### C Comparison with Predicate(s):
| Device & Predicate Device(s): | K213426 | K122584 |
| --- | --- | --- |
K213426 - Page 2 of 12
{2}
K213426 - Page 3 of 12
| Device Trade Name | HemosIL ReadiPlasTin | HemosIL ReadiPlasTin |
| --- | --- | --- |
| General Device Characteristic Similarities | | |
| Intended Use/Indications For Use | HemosIL ReadiPlasTin is an in vitro diagnostic thromboplastin reagent, based on recombinant human tissue factor, for the quantitative determination, in human citrated plasma, of Prothrombin Time (PT) and Fibrinogen, on the ACL TOP Family and ACL TOP Family 50 Series of analyzers. The product is intended to be used for the evaluation of the extrinsic coagulation pathway and the monitoring of Oral Vitamin K Antagonist Therapy. | Same |
| Test Principle | Prothrombin Time (PT): In the PT test, the addition of the tissue thromboplastin to the citrated patient plasma, in the presence of calcium, initiates the activation of the extrinsic pathway. This results in the conversion of fibrinogen to fibrin, with the formation of a solid gel. PT-derived Fibrinogen: Fibrinogen is quantitated (PT-based method) by relating the absorbance or light scatter during clotting to a calibrator. | Same |
| Sample Type | 3.2% and 3.8% citrated plasma | Same |
| Measurement | Quantitative | Same |
| Instrumentation | ACL TOP Family (K160276)
ACL TOP Family 50 Series (K150877) | Same |
| Testing Methodology | Coagulometric | Same |
| Quality Control | Automated QC | Same |
{3}
| On-Board Stability | 10 days at 15°C on the instrument | Same |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Open Vial Stability | 10 days at 2–8°C in closed original vial | Same |
| General Device Characteristic Differences | | |
| Reporting Units | PT: Seconds, INR
Fibrinogen: mg/dL, g/L | PT: Seconds, % Activity, INR
Fibrinogen: mg/dL, g/L |
| Formulation | Same as the predicate except the following formulation changes:
1. Addition of EDTA to ReadiPlasTin Reagent as a stabilizer for improved stability.
2. Removal of bovine gamma globulin (BGG) and trehalose from ReadiPlasTin Reagent and trehalose from ReadiPlasTin Diluent as inactive ingredients (fillers) with no intended purpose in liquid reagents. These ingredients are a carryover from a previous generation of lyophilized reagents. | Each ReadiPlasTin kit consists of:
ReadiPlasTin Reagent: A solution of recombinant human tissue factor, synthetic phospholipids with stabilizers, preservative and buffer
ReadiPlasTin Diluent: An aqueous solution of calcium chloride, polybrene and a preservative. |
VI Standards/Guidance Documents Referenced:
- CLSI EP05-A3: Evaluation of Precision of Quantitative Measurement Procedures; Approved Guideline – Third Edition
- CLSI EP06: Evaluation of the Linearity of Quantitative Measurement Procedures; 2nd Edition
- CLSI EP07: Interference Testing in Clinical Chemistry; 3rd Edition
- CLSI H21-A5: Collection, Transport, and Processing of Blood Specimens for Testing Plasma-Based Coagulation Assays and Molecular Hemostasis Assays; Approved Guideline – Fifth Edition
- CLSI EP25-A: Evaluation of Stability of In Vitro Diagnostic Reagents; Approve Guideline
- CLSI H47-A2: One-Stage Prothrombin Time (PT) Test and Activated Partial Thromboplastin Time (APTT) Test; Approved Guideline – Second Edition
VII Performance Characteristics (if/when applicable):
A Analytical Performance:
K213426 - Page 4 of 12
{4}
# 1. Precision/Reproducibility:
Intermediate precision testing for PT, INR, and Fibrinogen was performed at a single internal location by a single operator on one ACL TOP 700 and one ACL TOP 750. The study was conducted for 20 days, with two runs per day and two replicates per run. Each run was at least two hours apart. Three lots of reformulated HemosIL ReadiPlasTin reagent were used with tri-level controls to evaluate PT and Fibrinogen. Six native patient samples were tested for PT/INR at various INR ranges seen in the tables below. Six fibrinogen clinical samples were used and two sample pools at each concentration were tested, $\sim 100\mathrm{mg / dL}$ , $\sim 300\mathrm{mg / dL}$ , and $\sim 600\mathrm{mg / dL}$ . The acceptance criteria were met for all samples in the studies.
Summary Precision Results for PT (sec) on ACL TOP 700
| Sample | N | Mean | Repeatability | | Between Run | | Between Day | | Within Lot | | Between Lot | | Within Lab | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | | SD | CV% | SD | CV% | SD | CV% | SD | CV% | SD | CV% | SD | CV% |
| Normal Control | 80 | 11.4 | 0.10 | 0.9 | 0.00 | 0.0 | 0.06 | 0.5 | 0.09 | 0.8 | 0.18 | 1.6 | 0.20 | 1.1 |
| Low Abn Control | 80 | 22.5 | 0.22 | 1.0 | 0.16 | 0.7 | 0.11 | 0.5 | 0.29 | 1.3 | 0.43 | 2.0 | 0.52 | 1.3 |
| High Abn Control | 80 | 37.5 | 0.22 | 0.6 | 0.18 | 0.5 | 0.18 | 0.5 | 0.34 | 0.9 | 0.92 | 2.5 | 0.98 | 0.8 |
| 1.5–2.5 INR | 80 | 20.8 | 0.17 | 0.8 | 0.09 | 0.4 | 0.09 | 0.4 | 0.21 | 1.0 | 0.45 | 2.2 | 0.50 | 1.1 |
| 1.5–3.0 INR | 80 | 31.4 | 0.28 | 0.9 | 0.45 | 1.4 | 0.00 | 0.0 | 0.53 | 1.7 | 0.57 | 1.9 | 0.78 | 1.7 |
| 2.5–3.5 INR | 80 | 34.5 | 0.25 | 0.7 | 0.08 | 0.2 | 0.12 | 0.4 | 0.29 | 0.9 | 0.70 | 2.1 | 0.76 | 0.8 |
| 2.5–4.0 INR | 80 | 39.6 | 0.31 | 0.8 | 0.05 | 0.1 | 0.14 | 0.4 | 0.34 | 0.9 | 0.73 | 1.9 | 0.81 | 0.8 |
| 4.0–4.5 INR | 80 | 48.3 | 0.43 | 0.9 | 0.32 | 0.7 | 0.36 | 0.8 | 0.65 | 1.4 | 0.64 | 1.3 | 0.91 | 1.4 |
| ≥ 4.5 INR | 80 | 52.1 | 0.64 | 1.0 | 0.32 | 0.6 | 0.51 | 1.0 | 0.88 | 1.7 | 0.73 | 1.4 | 1.14 | 1.7 |
Summary of Precision Results for PT (sec) on ACL TOP 750
| Sample | N | Mean | Repeatability | | Between Run | | Between Day | | Within Lot | | Between Lot | | Within Lab | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | | SD | CV% | SD | CV% | SD | CV% | SD | CV% | SD | CV% | SD | CV% |
| Normal Control | 80 | 11.8 | 0.09 | 0.7 | 0.00 | 0.0 | 0.06 | 0.5 | 0.11 | 0.9 | 0.07 | 0.6 | 0.13 | 1.0 |
| Low Abn Control | 80 | 23.3 | 0.22 | 0.8 | 0.10 | 0.5 | 0.10 | 0.4 | 0.26 | 1.1 | 0.26 | 1.1 | 0.37 | 0.9 |
| High Abn Control | 80 | 38.4 | 0.55 | 1.0 | 0.00 | 0.0 | 0.24 | 0.6 | 0.60 | 1.6 | 0.51 | 1.4 | 0.79 | 1.0 |
| 1.5–2.5 INR | 80 | 21.4 | 0.23 | 0.7 | 0.07 | 0.3 | 0.13 | 0.6 | 0.27 | 1.3 | 0.39 | 1.8 | 0.48 | 1.0 |
K213426 - Page 5 of 12
{5}
| Sample | N | Mean | Repeatability | | Between Run | | Between Day | | Within Lot | | Between Lot | | Within Lab | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | | SD | CV% | SD | CV% | SD | CV% | SD | CV% | SD | CV% | SD | CV% |
| 1.5–3.0 INR | 80 | 33.0 | 0.33 | 0.8 | 0.16 | 0.5 | 0.17 | 0.5 | 0.40 | 1.2 | 0.54 | 1.7 | 0.68 | 1.0 |
| 2.5–3.5 INR | 80 | 36.2 | 0.28 | 0.7 | 0.22 | 0.6 | 0.16 | 0.4 | 0.39 | 1.1 | 0.44 | 1.2 | 0.59 | 1.0 |
| 2.5–4.0 INR | 80 | 41.6 | 0.30 | 0.7 | 0.35 | 0.9 | 0.19 | 0.4 | 0.50 | 1.2 | 0.44 | 1.1 | 0.67 | 1.2 |
| 4.0–4.5 INR | 80 | 48.6 | 0.60 | 0.9 | 0.38 | 0.8 | 0.55 | 1.1 | 0.90 | 1.9 | 0.31 | 0.6 | 0.95 | 1.6 |
| ≥ 4.5 INR | 80 | 53.2 | 0.61 | 1.1 | 0.56 | 1.1 | 0.60 | 1.1 | 1.02 | 1.9 | 1.32 | 2.5 | 1.67 | 1.7 |
Summary of Precision Results for PT (INR) on ACL TOP 700
| Sample | N | Mean | Repeatability | | Between Run | | Between Day | | Within Lot | | Between Lot | | Within Lab | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | | SD | CV% | SD | CV% | SD | CV% | SD | CV% | SD | CV% | SD | CV% |
| 1.5–2.5 INR | 80 | 1.81 | 0.02 | 1.0 | 0.01 | 0.4 | 0.01 | 0.4 | 0.02 | 1.1 | 0.01 | 0.7 | 0.02 | 1.2 |
| 1.5–3.0 INR | 80 | 2.76 | 0.03 | 1.7 | 0.04 | 1.5 | 0.00 | 0.0 | 0.05 | 1.8 | 0.01 | 0.4 | 0.05 | 2.0 |
| 2.5–3.5 INR | 80 | 3.04 | 0.02 | 0.7 | 0.01 | 0.2 | 0.01 | 0.4 | 0.03 | 0.9 | 0.02 | 0.7 | 0.03 | 0.9 |
| 2.5–4.0 INR | 80 | 3.52 | 0.03 | 0.7 | 0.00 | 0.1 | 0.01 | 0.4 | 0.03 | 0.9 | 0.02 | 0.5 | 0.04 | 0.8 |
| 4.0–4.5 INR | 80 | 4.31 | 0.04 | 1.2 | 0.03 | 0.7 | 0.03 | 0.8 | 0.06 | 1.4 | 0.01 | 0.3 | 0.06 | 1.5 |
| ≥ 4.5 INR | 80 | 4.66 | 0.06 | 1.2 | 0.03 | 0.6 | 0.05 | 1.0 | 0.08 | 1.7 | 0.05 | 1.0 | 0.09 | 1.7 |
Summary of Precision Results for PT (INR) on ACL TOP 750
| Sample | N | Mean | Repeatability | | Between Run | | Between Day | | Within Lot | | Between Lot | | Within Lab | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | | SD | CV% | SD | CV% | SD | CV% | SD | CV% | SD | CV% | SD | CV% |
| 1.5–2.5 INR | 80 | 1.79 | 0.02 | 0.8 | 0.00 | 0.2 | 0.01 | 0.5 | 0.02 | 1.3 | 0.03 | 1.4 | 0.03 | 1.1 |
| 1.5–3.0 INR | 80 | 2.79 | 0.03 | 1.0 | 0.02 | 0.5 | 0.00 | 0.0 | 0.03 | 1.2 | 0.02 | 0.7 | 0.04 | 1.0 |
| 2.5–3.5 INR | 80 | 3.09 | 0.03 | 0.9 | 0.02 | 0.6 | 0.01 | 0.3 | 0.03 | 1.1 | 0.02 | 0.5 | 0.04 | 1.0 |
| 2.5–4.0 INR | 80 | 3.54 | 0.03 | 1.2 | 0.03 | 0.9 | 0.01 | 0.4 | 0.04 | 1.2 | 0.03 | 0.7 | 0.05 | 1.4 |
| 4.0–4.5 INR | 80 | 4.16 | 0.05 | 1.2 | 0.03 | 0.8 | 0.05 | 1.2 | 0.08 | 1.9 | 0.04 | 0.9 | 0.09 | 1.7 |
| ≥ 4.5 INR | 80 | 4.56 | 0.05 | 1.5 | 0.05 | 1.1 | 0.04 | 0.9 | 0.09 | 1.9 | 0.08 | 1.6 | 0.11 | 2.0 |
Summary of Precision Results for Fibrinogen (mg/dL) on ACL TOP 700
K213426 - Page 6 of 12
{6}
| Sample | N | Mean | Repeatability | | Between Run | | Between Day | | Within Lot | | Between Lot | | Within Lab | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | | SD | CV% | SD | CV% | SD | CV% | SD | CV% | SD | CV% | SD | CV% |
| Normal Control | 80 | 329 | 3.69 | 1.1 | 0.00 | 0.0 | 2.03 | 0.6 | 4.21 | 1.3 | 3.32 | 1.0 | 5.36 | 1.2 |
| Low Abn Control | 80 | 171 | 2.24 | 1.2 | 0.94 | 0.6 | 0.94 | 0.6 | 2.61 | 1.6 | 2.89 | 1.7 | 3.89 | 1.5 |
| Low Fib Control | 80 | 130 | 3.29 | 1.8 | 0.00 | 0.0 | 1.04 | 0.8 | 3.45 | 2.7 | 2.22 | 1.7 | 4.10 | 2.0 |
| ~100 mg/dL Fib | 80 | 111 | 1.31 | 1.1 | 0.00 | 0.0 | 0.00 | 0.0 | 1.31 | 1.2 | 2.42 | 2.2 | 2.75 | 1.2 |
| ~100 mg/dL Fib | 80 | 116 | 1.28 | 1.1 | 0.00 | 0.0 | 1.46 | 1.3 | 1.94 | 1.7 | 2.40 | 2.1 | 3.09 | 1.5 |
| ~300 mg/dL Fib | 80 | 315 | 2.36 | 0.6 | 1.03 | 0.3 | 1.54 | 0.5 | 3.00 | 1.0 | 4.34 | 1.4 | 5.27 | 0.8 |
| ~300 mg/dL Fib | 80 | 338 | 2.57 | 0.8 | 1.27 | 0.4 | 0.44 | 0.1 | 2.90 | 0.9 | 4.36 | 1.3 | 5.24 | 0.9 |
| ~600 mg/dL Fib | 80 | 626 | 4.03 | 0.6 | 1.90 | 0.3 | 2.30 | 0.4 | 5.02 | 0.8 | 8.85 | 1.4 | 10.17 | 0.8 |
| ~600 mg/dL Fib | 80 | 636 | 5.00 | 0.8 | 2.32 | 0.4 | 3.31 | 0.5 | 6.43 | 1.0 | 8.22 | 1.3 | 10.44 | 1.0 |
Summary of Precision Results for Fibrinogen (mg/dL) on ACL TOP 750
| Sample | N | Mean PT | Repeatability | | Between Run | | Between Day | | Within Lot | | Between Lot | | Within Lab | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | | SD | CV% | SD | CV% | SD | CV% | SD | CV% | SD | CV% | SD | CV% |
| Normal Control | 80 | 319 | 3.79 | 1.3 | 0.31 | 0.1 | 1.20 | 0.4 | 3.99 | 1.2 | 1.29 | 0.4 | 4.19 | 1.4 |
| Low Abn Control | 80 | 157 | 1.92 | 1.0 | 1.46 | 0.9 | 0.00 | 0.0 | 2.41 | 1.5 | 1.44 | 0.9 | 2.81 | 1.4 |
| Low Fib Control | 80 | 120 | 2.73 | 2.0 | 0.86 | 0.7 | 0.70 | 0.6 | 2.95 | 2.4 | 2.57 | 2.1 | 3.91 | 2.3 |
| ~100 mg/dL Fib | 80 | 106 | 1.50 | 1.2 | 0.00 | 0.0 | 0.54 | 0.5 | 1.60 | 1.5 | 1.40 | 1.3 | 2.12 | 1.4 |
| ~100 mg/dL Fib | 80 | 110 | 1.42 | 1.1 | 0.57 | 0.5 | 0.00 | 0.0 | 1.53 | 1.4 | 1.58 | 1.4 | 2.20 | 1.3 |
| ~300 mg/dL Fib | 80 | 307 | 2.81 | 0.9 | 2.06 | 0.7 | 1.08 | 0.3 | 3.64 | 1.2 | 0.56 | 0.2 | 3.69 | 1.2 |
| ~300 mg/dL Fib | 80 | 330 | 3.10 | 0.6 | 1.62 | 0.5 | 0.48 | 0.1 | 3.53 | 1.1 | 0.93 | 0.3 | 3.65 | 0.9 |
| ~600 mg/dL Fib | 80 | 624 | 5.02 | 0.7 | 3.15 | 0.5 | 2.89 | 0.5 | 6.59 | 1.1 | 5.72 | 0.9 | 8.73 | 1.1 |
| ~600 mg/dL Fib | 80 | 635 | 5.05 | 0.8 | 4.52 | 0.7 | 3.83 | 0.6 | 7.79 | 1.2 | 6.52 | 1.0 | 10.16 | 1.2 |
# 2. Linearity:
Fibrinogen linearity testing was performed using three lots of reformulated HemosIL ReadiPlasTin reagent. Ten samples were ran on an ACL TOP 700 analyzer and an ACL TOP 750 analyzer. A normal donor plasma was used as the high fibrinogen sample ( $>700\mathrm{mg/dL}$ ), while a low fibrinogen sample ( $<60\mathrm{mg/dL}$ ) was prepared by mixing $7\mathrm{mL}$ cryo-precipitated
K213426 - Page 7 of 12
{7}
low fibrinogen plasma with 9 mL ultra-low fibrinogen plasma. The two samples were used to prepare 10 samples ranging from ~60 mg/dL to ~800 mg/dL. The result demonstrates that HemosIL ReadiPlasTin reagent is linear within the range of 60 to 700 mg/dL for fibrinogen.
A factor linearity study for extrinsic factors II, V, VII and X was performed with one lot of reformulated HemosIL ReadiPlasTin on an ACL TOP 700 analyzer and an ACL TOP 750 analyzer. Results met acceptance criteria.
Factor Linearity Summary Results
| Factor | Analyzer | Fibrinogen Linearity Results | | | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | Range Tested | Slope | Intercept | Correlation Coefficient (r) |
| Factor II (K050661) | ACL TOP 700 (K160276) | 0.1–151.1% | 0.93 | 6.25 | 0.99 |
| | ACL TOP 750 (K150877) | 0.1–167.2% | 0.91 | 6.19 | 0.99 |
| Factor V (K023839) | ACL TOP 700 (K160276) | 0.5–155.4% | 0.98 | 2.25 | 1.00 |
| | ACL TOP 750 (K150877) | 0.4–163.7% | 0.97 | 3.82 | 1.00 |
| Factor VII (K024082) | ACL TOP 700 (K160276) | 0.3–173.4% | 0.97 | 1.59 | 1.00 |
| | ACL TOP 750 (K150877) | 0.3–186.0% | 1.01 | 0.69 | 1.00 |
| Factor X (K031122) | ACL TOP 700 (K160276) | 0.6–196.0% | 1.08 | -1.32 | 1.00 |
| | ACL TOP 750 (K150877) | 0.5–186.7% | 1.06 | 0.28 | 1.00 |
# 3. Analytical Specificity/Interference:
# Interference Study
An interference study was performed for unfractionated (UF) heparin, low molecular weight heparin (LMWH), hemoglobin, triglycerides, bilirubin (conjugated and unconjugated), and daptomycin with one lot of reformulated HemosIL ReadiPlasTin for prothrombin time and fibrinogen on an ACL TOP Family Analyzer.
Two levels of plasma were used: 1) a commercially available normal pooled plasma 2) a commercially available pool of oral anticoagulant patient samples with an INR 2.0-3.0. The two sample levels were spiked with multiple levels of the indicated interferent and tested in quadruplicate. The data was then compared to the un-spiked control result. Interference limits are found in the table below.
Interference Limits
| Assay | UFH | LMWH | Hemoglobin | Triglyceride | Bilirubin Conjugated and Unconjugated | Daptomycin |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| PT | 1.0 IU/mL | 1.4 IU/mL | 500 mg/dL | 1000 mg/dL | 50 mg/dL | 100 μg/mL |
| Fibrinogen | 1.5 IU/mL | 1.7 IU/mL | 500 mg/dL | 600 mg/dL | 50 mg/dL | 200 μg/mL |
# Extrinsic Factor Sensitivity
To demonstrate extrinsic factor sensitivity, a study was performed to evaluate the performance of the reformulated HemosIL ReadiPlasTin (K213426) to a released on-market lot of HemosIL ReadiPlasTin (K122584) and determine the factor level at which the
K213426 - Page 8 of 12
{8}
prothrombin time rises above the upper limit of the reference interval. Samples were prepared by mixing HemosIL factor deficient plasma with normal pool plasma of known assayed factors to create eight dilutions. Concentrations ranged from 7.8% to 95.1% factor activity. Prothrombin time was determined on each plasma dilution in duplicate on an ACL TOP 700 analyzer.
| Reagent/Extrinsic Factor | Factor II | Factor V | Factor VII | Factor X |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Reformulated ReadiPlasTin | 36% | 58% | 52% | 68% |
## Vial Stopper Compatibility
Five vials of each prototype ReadiPlasTin reagent (P1119220) and diluent (P1119221) were packed into HemosIL ReadiPlasTin kit cartons (4 kits total) and stored inverted at 2–8°C. One kit per timepoint (7, 14, 21 and 51 days) was removed and tested for PT recovery of tri-level controls (Normal, Low Abnormal, and High Abnormal). Vials were reconstituted by pouring the contents of the diluent directly into the reagent. The mean of five inverted vials were compared to the mean of five vials stored upright. There was no observed change or deposits on the stoppers. The results from the study indicate that the reagent and diluent are compatible with the stopper material.
4. Assay Reportable Range:
Not Applicable.
5. Traceability, Stability, Expected Values (Controls, Calibrators, or Methods):
## Real-time Shelf-Life (closed vial)
Real-time shelf-life stability testing was performed using three lots of reformulated HemosIL ReadiPlasTin tested on one ACL TOP 700 analyzer. Prothrombin time (PT) was tested using low, normal, and high PT controls as well as four native PT patient samples (1.5–4.0 INR). Fibrinogen was tested using normal and low fibrinogen controls, as well as two samples at each of the following three levels of pooled fibrinogen: ~100 mg/dL, ~300 mg/dL, and ~600 mg/dL. The HemosIL ReadiPlasTin reagent was stored at 2–8°C and tested for eight replicates at different time points. The shelf-life test is ongoing and the current results support a 15-month shelf-time claim for HemosIL ReadiPlasTin at 2–8°C.
## Open Vial Stability
Open vial stability testing at 2–8°C was performed using three lots of reformulated HemosIL ReadiPlasTin tested on one ACL TOP 700 analyzer. PT was tested using low, normal, and high PT controls as well as four native PT patient samples (1.5–4.0 INR). Fibrinogen was tested using normal and low fibrinogen controls, as well as two samples at three levels: ~100 mg/dL, ~300 mg/dL, and ~600 mg/dL pooled fibrinogen. The HemosIL ReadiPlasTin reagent was stored at 2–8°C and tested for eight replicates at different time points. The results support an open vial stability claim of 10 days at 2–8°C.
K213426 - Page 9 of 12
{9}
# On-Board Instrument Stability
On-board instrument stability testing was performed using three lots of reformulated HemosIL ReadiPlasTin tested on one ACL TOP 700 analyzer. PT was tested using low, normal, and high PT controls as well as four native PT patient samples (1.5–4.0 INR). Fibrinogen was tested using normal and low fibrinogen controls, as well as two samples at three levels: ~100 mg/dL, ~300 mg/dL, and ~600 mg/dL pooled fibrinogen. The HemosIL ReadiPlasTin reagent was stored on-board the analyzer and tested for eight replicates at different time points. The test results support an on-board stability claim of 10 days.
# Simulated Shipping Study
Two lots of reformulated ReadiPlasTin were subjected to simulated shipping conditions of vibration and drop, and summer thermal shipping stress based on the ISTA summer temperature profile. In addition, a separate set of vials with reformulated ReadiPlasTin were subjected to -20°C freeze/thaw stress. After the simulated stress, the same vials were tested for functionality with plasma controls. The results demonstrate transport stability of reformulated ReadiPlasTin at temperatures ≤ -20°C and 35°C.
# 37°C Thermal Stability with EDTA Concentration Study
A thermal stress stability study at 37°C for 28 and 35 days was conducted using two lots of HemosIL ReadiPlasTin. The HemosIL ReadiPlasTin liquid reagent was spiked with EDTA at different concentrations (0, 0.15, 0.25, 0.35, 0.5, 1.0, 1.5 mM EDTA) prior to the addition of the diluent and tested for PT. Three levels of quality control material, HemosIL normal, low abnormal, and high abnormal were ran in duplicate with three reagent vials at each time point (Day 0, 7, 14, 20, and 28; Day 35 for 1 lot). To determine the optimal EDTA concentration, the % drift was calculated from the baseline PT (sec) at 2–8°C. This study indicated that 0.5 mM is the optimal amount of EDTA that can be added to the HemosIL ReadiPlasTin reagent.
# High-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) Analysis
Two pilot lots with 0.5 mM EDTA and without EDTA, were tested for lipid concentration by HPLC for 28 and 35 days respectively. Lipid concentration was evaluated quantitatively for change in concentration over time at 37°C (Day 0, 7, 14, 20, and 28; Day 35 for 1 lot). Lipid content was evaluated qualitatively by comparing peak shapes from HPLC chromatograms of reagent from unstressed vials and stressed vials, with and without EDTA. Pilot vials with 0.5 mM EDTA compared to 0 mM EDTA showed minimal change in lipid content over the 28 and 35 days.
# Phospholipase Tolerance
Two pilot lots, with and without EDTA added, were spiked with phospholipases and thermally stressed at 37°C and then reconstituted with ReadiPlasTin kit matched diluent and tested with three levels (normal, low abnormal, and high abnormal) of quality control for PT(s) recovery. Percent (%) drift was calculated and demonstrated pilot lots without EDTA added do not exhibit tolerance against phospholipases after three days or less of stress. Pilots
K213426 - Page 10 of 12
{10}
with EDTA added demonstrated resistance against phospholipase effects, with 0.5 mM EDTA showing the greatest tolerance.
6. Detection Limit:
Not applicable.
7. Assay Cut-Off:
Not applicable.
## B Comparison Studies:
### 1. Method Comparison:
An in-house method comparison study was performed to compare the performance of the reformulated HemosIL ReadiPlasTin assay versus the RecombiPlasTin 2G assay (K070005), on both one ACL TOP 700 and one ACL TOP 750. The reformulated HemosIL ReadiPlasTin performed comparably to the HemosIL RecombiPlasTin 2G. All acceptance criteria were met, including when only vitamin K antagonists (VKA) samples were evaluated.
**Method Comparison: Reformulated vs 2G INR Summary**
| | ACL TOP 700 | ACL TOP 750 |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Sample Count (n) | 160 | 160 |
| INR Range | 0.84–14.66 | 0.85–13.53 |
| Correlation coefficient (r) | 0.997 | 0.996 |
| Intercept (95% CI) | -0.043 (-0.068, -0.018) | -0.034 (-0.060, -0.009) |
| Weighted Deming Slope (95% CI) | 1.031 (1.009, 1.053) | 1.021 (0.999, 1.043) |
| Predicated Bias at MDL of 2.0 INR | 0.9% (-0.1, 2.0%) | 4.1% (2.6, 5.5%) |
**Method Comparison: Reformulated vs 2G INR Summary – VKA Samples Only**
| | ACL TOP 700 | ACL TOP 750 |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Sample Count (n) | 51 | 51 |
| INR Range | 1.55–14.66 | 1.63–13.53 |
| Weighted Deming Slope (95% CI) | 1.04 (1.006, 1.078) | 1.029 (0.992, 1.067) |
| Intercept (95% CI) | 0.011 (-0.072, 0.094) | 0.023 (-0.061, 0.107) |
| Correlation coefficient (r) | 0.998 | 0.997 |
| Predicated Bias at MDL of 2.0 INR | 4.8% (3.5, 6.1%) | 4.1% (2.6, 5.5%) |
**Method Comparison: Reformulated vs 2G Fibrinogen Summary**
| | ACL TOP 700 | ACL TOP 750 |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Sample Count (n) | 135 | 134 |
| Fibrinogen Range | 68–690 | 71–687 |
| Correlation coefficient (r) | 0.995 | 0.997 |
| Intercept (95% CI) | 7.171 (3.842, 10.50) | -0.811 (-4.148, 2.527) |
| Weighted Deming Slope (95% CI) | 0.975 (0.963, 0.986) | 1.015 (1.003, 1.027) |
K213426 - Page 11 of 12
{11}
| Predicated Bias at MDL of 2.0 INR (~282 mg/dL Fibrinogen) | -0.1% (-0.6, 0.6%) | 0.8% (0.5, 1.9%) |
| --- | --- | --- |
2. Matrix Comparison:
Not applicable
C Clinical Studies:
1. Clinical Sensitivity:
Not applicable.
2. Clinical Specificity:
Not applicable.
3. Other Clinical Supportive Data (When 1. and 2. Are Not Applicable):
Not applicable.
D Clinical Cut-Off:
Not applicable.
E Expected Values/Reference Range:
See K122584.
VIII Proposed Labeling:
The labeling supports the finding of substantial equivalence for this device.
IX Conclusion:
The submitted information in this premarket notification is complete and supports a substantial equivalence decision.
K213426 - Page 12 of 12
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.