AI/ML, Software as a Medical Device, Real-World Evidence
Real-World Evidence
Submission
Device
Sponsor
RWD Sources
RWE Use Summary
Key Tags
K232410 · May 10, 2024
SmartChest
Milvue
Retrospective clinical X-ray images from four French institutions
The device's AI algorithm was trained using a retrospective dataset of 9,560 chest X-ray images collected from routine clinical practice (unfiltered stream of exams) to ensure the model is representative of real-life distribution.
Algorithm training; Retrospective clinical data; AI model development
Clinical Evidence
Study Design
Population
Comparator
Key Endpoints
Algorithm Training Dataset; Retrospective analysis of routine clinical data; Follow-up/Duration: October 2018 - December 2021; Study Period: 2018-2021
Chest X-ray images from four French institutions; Sample Size: 9560 images; Number of Sites: 4
Training Set: 9,560 images (7,412 no findings, 1,435 pleural effusion, 713 pneumothorax)
—
300 Chest X-Ray cases of transitional adolescent and adult US subjects
3 (ABR-certified radiologists)
Indications for Use
SmartChest is a radiological computer assisted triage and notification software that analyzes frontal chest X-ray images (Postero-Anterior (PA) or Antero-Posterior (AP)) of transitional adolescents (18 -21 yo but treated like adults) and adults (≥22 yo) for the presence of suspected pleural effusion and/or pneumothorax. SmartChest uses an artificial intelligence algorithm to analyze the images for features suggestive of critical findings and provides case-level output available to a PACS (or other DICOM storage platforms) for worklist prioritization. As a passive notification for prioritization-only software tool within the standard of care workflow, SmartChest does not send a proactive alert directly to a trained medical specialist. SmartChest is not intended to direct attention to a specific portion of an image. Its results are not intended to be used on a stand-alone basis for clinical decision-making.
Device Story
SmartChest is a radiological computer-aided triage and notification software; analyzes frontal (PA/AP) chest X-rays for suspected pleural effusion and/or pneumothorax. Input: DICOM images from PACS/storage; Output: case-level notification via secondary capture DICOM series indicating suspected findings or processed status. Used in clinical settings by radiologists/specialists; integrates into existing PACS worklists to prioritize suspicious exams. Does not alter interpretation queue or provide diagnostic information; intended for prioritization only. Benefits: enables clinicians to group suspicious exams for faster review, potentially improving workflow efficiency. Operates on local or cloud servers; results are passive notifications; clinicians must review all images regardless of device output.
Clinical Evidence
Two standalone performance studies using 300 US-based chest X-ray cases each (transitional adolescents and adults). Reference standard established by majority consensus of three ABR-certified radiologists. Pneumothorax: AUC 0.989, Sensitivity 92.7%, Specificity 97.3%. Pleural effusion: AUC 0.975, Sensitivity 93.3%, Specificity 90.0%. Mean execution times reported for local and cloud servers.
Technological Characteristics
Radiological computer-aided triage and notification software. Uses AI-based CNN algorithms. Connectivity: PACS/DICOM storage platforms. Deployment: local or cloud server. Software lifecycle: IEC 62304:2006/A1:2016 compliant. Outputs: secondary capture DICOM images with study-level status tags.
Indications for Use
Indicated for transitional adolescents (18-21 yo) and adults (≥22 yo) to analyze frontal (PA/AP) chest X-rays for suspected pleural effusion and/or pneumothorax to prioritize worklists. Not for stand-alone diagnostic use; does not direct attention to specific image regions.
Regulatory Classification
Identification
Radiological computer aided triage and notification software is an image processing prescription device intended to aid in prioritization and triage of radiological medical images. The device notifies a designated list of clinicians of the availability of time sensitive radiological medical images for review based on computer aided image analysis of those images performed by the device. The device does not mark, highlight, or direct users' attention to a specific location in the original image. The device does not remove cases from a reading queue. The device operates in parallel with the standard of care, which remains the default option for all cases.
Special Controls
Radiological computer aided triage and notification software must comply with the following special controls: 1. Design verification and validation must include: i. A detailed description of the notification and triage algorithms and all underlying image analysis algorithms including, but not limited to, a detailed description of the algorithm inputs and outputs, each major component or block, how the algorithm affects or relates to clinical practice or patient care, and any algorithm limitations. ii. A detailed description of pre-specified performance testing protocols and dataset(s) used to assess whether the device will provide effective triage (e.g., improved time to review of prioritized images for pre-specified clinicians). iii. Results from performance testing that demonstrate that the device will provide effective triage. The performance assessment must be based on an appropriate measure to estimate the clinical effectiveness. The test dataset must contain sufficient numbers of cases from important cohorts (e.g., subsets defined by clinically relevant confounders, effect modifiers, associated diseases, and subsets defined by image acquisition characteristics) such that the performance estimates and confidence intervals for these individual subsets can be characterized with the device for the intended use population and imaging equipment. iv. Standalone performance testing protocols and results of the device. v. Appropriate software documentation (e.g., device hazard analysis; software requirements specification document; software design specification document; traceability analysis; description of verification and validation activities including system level test protocol, pass/fail criteria, and results). 2. Labeling must include the following: i. A detailed description of the patient population for which the device is indicated for use. ii. A detailed description of the intended user and user training that addresses appropriate use protocols for the device. iii. Discussion of warnings, precautions, and limitations must include situations in which the device may fail or may not operate at its expected performance level (e.g., poor image quality for certain subpopulations), as applicable. iv. A detailed description of compatible imaging hardware, imaging protocols, and requirements for input images. v. Device operating instructions. vi. A detailed summary of the performance testing, including: test methods, dataset characteristics, triage effectiveness (e.g., improved time to review of prioritized images for pre-specified clinicians), diagnostic accuracy of algorithms informing triage decision, and results with associated statistical uncertainty (e.g., confidence intervals), including a summary of subanalyses on case distributions stratified by relevant confounders, such as lesion and organ characteristics, disease stages, and imaging equipment.
*Classification.* Class II (special controls). The special controls for this device are:(1) Design verification and validation must include:
(i) A detailed description of the notification and triage algorithms and all underlying image analysis algorithms including, but not limited to, a detailed description of the algorithm inputs and outputs, each major component or block, how the algorithm affects or relates to clinical practice or patient care, and any algorithm limitations.
(ii) A detailed description of pre-specified performance testing protocols and dataset(s) used to assess whether the device will provide effective triage (
*e.g.,* improved time to review of prioritized images for pre-specified clinicians).(iii) Results from performance testing that demonstrate that the device will provide effective triage. The performance assessment must be based on an appropriate measure to estimate the clinical effectiveness. The test dataset must contain sufficient numbers of cases from important cohorts (
*e.g.,* subsets defined by clinically relevant confounders, effect modifiers, associated diseases, and subsets defined by image acquisition characteristics) such that the performance estimates and confidence intervals for these individual subsets can be characterized with the device for the intended use population and imaging equipment.(iv) Stand-alone performance testing protocols and results of the device.
(v) Appropriate software documentation (
*e.g.,* device hazard analysis; software requirements specification document; software design specification document; traceability analysis; description of verification and validation activities including system level test protocol, pass/fail criteria, and results).(2) Labeling must include the following:
(i) A detailed description of the patient population for which the device is indicated for use;
(ii) A detailed description of the intended user and user training that addresses appropriate use protocols for the device;
(iii) Discussion of warnings, precautions, and limitations must include situations in which the device may fail or may not operate at its expected performance level (
*e.g.,* poor image quality for certain subpopulations), as applicable;(iv) A detailed description of compatible imaging hardware, imaging protocols, and requirements for input images;
(v) Device operating instructions; and
(vi) A detailed summary of the performance testing, including: test methods, dataset characteristics, triage effectiveness (
*e.g.,* improved time to review of prioritized images for pre-specified clinicians), diagnostic accuracy of algorithms informing triage decision, and results with associated statistical uncertainty (*e.g.,* confidence intervals), including a summary of subanalyses on case distributions stratified by relevant confounders, such as lesion and organ characteristics, disease stages, and imaging equipment.
{0}------------------------------------------------
Image /page/0/Picture/0 description: The image contains the logo of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). On the left is the Department of Health & Human Services logo. To the right of that is the FDA logo, which is a blue square with the letters "FDA" in white. To the right of the blue square is the text "U.S. FOOD & DRUG ADMINISTRATION" in blue.
Milvue % Rory Carrillo Regulatory Consultant Cosm 45 Bartlett St. San Francisco, California 94110
May 10, 2024
Re: K232410
Trade/Device Name: SmartChest Regulation Number: 21 CFR 892.2080 Regulation Name: Radiological computer aided triage and notification software Regulatory Class: Class II Product Code: QFM Dated: August 10, 2023 Received: April 8, 2024
Dear Rory Carrillo:
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 (the 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 available 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.
Additional information about changes that may require a new premarket notification are provided in the FDA guidance documents entitled "Deciding When to Submit a 510(k) for a Change to an Existing Device" (https://www.fda.gov/media/99812/download) and "Deciding When to Submit a 510(k) for a Software Change to an Existing Device" (https://www.fda.gov/media/99785/download).
{1}------------------------------------------------
Your device is also subject to, among other requirements, the Quality System (QS) regulation (21 CFR Part 820), which includes, but is not limited to, 21 CFR 820.30, Design controls; 21 CFR 820.90, Nonconforming product; and 21 CFR 820.100, Corrective and preventive action. Please note that regardless of whether a change requires premarket review. the OS regulation requires device manufacturers to review and approve changes to device design and production (21 CFR 820.30 and 21 CFR 820.70) and document changes and approvals in the device master record (21 CFR 820.181).
Please be advised that FDA's issuance of a substantial equivalence determination does not mean that FDA has made a determination that your device complies with other requirements of the Act or any Federal statutes and regulations administered by other Federal agencies. You must comply with all the Act's requirements, including, but not limited to: registration and listing (21 CFR Part 807); labeling (21 CFR Part 801); medical device reporting of medical device-related adverse events) (21 CFR Part 803) for devices or postmarketing safety reporting (21 CFR Part 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 Part 4, Subpart A) for combination products; and, if applicable, the electronic product radiation control provisions (Sections 531-542 of the Act); 21 CFR Parts 1000-1050.
Also, please note the regulation entitled, "Misbranding by reference to premarket notification" (21 CFR 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 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,
Jessica Lamb, Ph.D. Assistant Director Imaging Software Team DHT8B: Division of Radiological Imaging Devices and Electronic Products OHT8: Office of Radiological Health Office of Product Evaluation and Quality Center for Devices and Radiological Health
{2}------------------------------------------------
### Indications for Use
Submission Number (if known)
#### K232410
Device Name
SmartChest
Indications for Use (Describe)
SmartChest is a radiological computer assisted triage and notification software that analyzes frontal chest X-ray images (Postero-Anterior (PA) or Antero-Posterior (AP)) of transitional adolescents (18 -21 yo but treated like adults) and adults (≥22 yo) for the presence of suspected pleural effusion and/or pneumothorax. SmartChest uses an artificial intelligence algorithm to analyze the images for features suggestive of critical findings and provides case-level output available to a PACS (or other DICOM storage platforms) for worklist prioritization.
As a passive notification for prioritization-only software tool within the standard of care workflow, SmartChest does not send a proactive alert directly to a trained medical specialist.
SmartChest is not intended to direct attention to a specific portion of an image. Its results are not intended to be used on a stand-alone basis for clinical decision-making.
Type of Use (Select one or both, as applicable)
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}------------------------------------------------
510(k) #: K232410
510(k) Summary
Prepared on: 2024-04-06
# Contact Details
21 CFR 807.92(a)(1)
| Applicant Name | Milvue | | | |
|------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------|---------------------|--|
| Applicant Address | 29 Rue du Faubourg Saint Jacques Paris 75014 France | | | |
| Applicant Contact Telephone | +33664224628 | | | |
| Applicant Contact | Mr. Mathieu Quintin | | | |
| Applicant Contact Email | mathieu@milvue.com | | | |
| Correspondent Name | | Cosm | | |
| Correspondent Address | | 45 Bartlett St. San Francisco CA 94110 United States | | |
| Correspondent Contact Telephone | | 5625337010 | | |
| Correspondent Contact | | Mr. Rory Carrillo | | |
| Correspondent Contact Email | | rory@cosmhq.com | | |
| Device Name | | | 21 CFR 807.92(a)(2) | |
| Device Trade Name | SmartChest | | | |
| Common Name | Radiological computer aided triage and notification software | | | |
| Classification Name | Radiological Computer-Assisted Prioritization Software For Lesions | | | |
| Regulation Number | 21 CFR 892.2080 | | | |
| Product Code | QFM | | | |
| Legally Marketed Predicate Devices | | | 21 CFR 807.92(a)(3) | |
| Predicate Trade Name (Primary Predicate is listed first)<br>Predicate# | | | Product Code | |
| K211733<br>Lunit INSIGHT CXR Triage | | | QFM | |
| Device Description Summary | | | 21 CFR 807.92(a)(4) | |
{4}------------------------------------------------
Smart Chest is a radiological computer assisted triage and notification software that analyzes (Postero-Anterior (PA) and/or Antero-Posterior (AP)) of transitional adolescents (18 ≤ age ≤ 21 yo but treated like adults) and adults (22 yo ≤ age) for the presence of suspected pleural effusion and/or pneumothorax. The software utilizes Al-based image analysis algorithms to detect the findings.
SmartChest provides case-level output available in the worklist prioritization by appropriately trained medical specialists qualified to interpret chest radiographs are automatically received from the user's image acquisition or storage systems (e.g., PACS, other DICOM storage platforms) and processed by SmartChest for analysis. After receiving Chest X-Ray images, the device automatically analyzes the images and identifies pre-spectied findings (pleural effusion and/or pneumothorax). Then the analysis results are passively sent by SmartChest yia a notfication to the worklist software being used (PACS, or other platforms).
The results are made available via a newly generated DICOM series (containing a secondary capture image), where DICOM tags contains the following information:
1. "SUSPECTED FINDING" or "CASE PROCESSED" if the algorithm ran successfully, "NOT PROCESSED" if the algorithm receives a study containing chest images that are not part of the intended use (lateral views or excluded age for example).
2. "SUSPECTED PLEURAL EFFUSION" OR "SUSPECTED PNEUMOTHORAX" if one pre-specified finding category identified OR,
3."SUSPECTED PLEURAL EFFUSION, PNEUMOTHORAX" if the two pre-specified finding categories identified
- 4. The secondary capture image returned in the storage system indicates at the study-level:
- The number of images received by SmartChest,
- The number of images processed by SmartChest,
- The status of the study: "NOT PROCESSED", "SUSPECTED FINDING" or "CASE PROCESSED".
The DICOM storage component may be a Picture Archiving and Communications (PACS) system or other local storage platforms. This would allow the appropriately trained medical specialists to group suspicious exams together that may potentially benefit their prioritization. Chest radiographs without an identified anomaly are placed in the worklist for routine review, which is the current standard of care.
The device is not intended to be a rule-out device and for cases that have been processed by the device without notification for prespecified suspected findings it should not be viewed as indicating that the pre-specified findings are excluded. SmartChest device does not alter the order nor remove imaging exams from the interpretation queue. Unflagged cases should still be interpreted by medical specialists.
The notification is contextual and does not provide any diagnostic information. The results are not intended to be used on a stand-alone basis for clinical decision-making. The summary image will display the following statement: "The product is not for Diagnostic Use-For Prioritization Only".
#### Model Training
The training of the algorithm is made by using X-Ray radiographies collected from an unfiltered stream of exams in four French institutions between October 2018 & December 2021.
The distribution of data, aggregated from unfiltered streams of exams of targeted institutions is necessarily representative of the real-life distribution. The Training Set is composed of 9560 images, the distribution of exams per pathology for the Training Set is as follows:
- i. No findings 7,412 images
- ii. Pleural Effusion 1,435 images
- iii. Pneumothorax 713 images
These images are then processed to fit the model's requirements, which can involve resizing and normalizing the images. A structure of the CNN is then defined, which consists of different types of layers. The collected data are used to train the model, adjusting its weights based on the errors it makes in predictions. To fine the model and prevent it from overly specializing in the training data, a separate validation set is used. Finally, the model's performance is assessed with a testing set to see how well it can handle unseen data. Depending on the results, it is possible to go back and adjust the data, model's structure, or fine-tuning parameters, then repeat the training process until the model performs satisfactorily
{5}------------------------------------------------
# Intended Use/Indications for Use
### 21 CFR 807.92(a)(5)
SmartChest is a radiological computer assisted triage and notification software that analyzes frontal chest X-ray images (Postero-Anterior (PA) or Antero-Posterior (AP)) of transitional adolescents (18 - 21 yo but treated like adults (222 yo) for the presence of suspected pleural effusion and/or pneumothorax. SmartChest uses an artificial intelligence algorithm to analyze the images for features suggestive of critical findings and provides case-level output available to a PACS (or other DICOM storage platforms) for worklist prioritization.
As a passive notification for prioritization-only software tool within the standard of care workflow, SmartChest does not send a proactive alert directly to a trained medical specialist.
SmartChest is not intended to direct attention to a specific portion of an image. Its results are not intended to be used on a stand-alone basis for clinical decision-making.
## Indications for Use Comparison
The predicate device Indications for Use is: Lunit INSIGHT CXR Triaqe is a radiological computer-assisted triage and notification software that analyzes adult chest X-ray images for the presence of pre-spected critical findings (pleural effusion and/or pneumothorax). Lunit INSIGHT CXR Triage uses an artificial intelligence algorithm to analyze images for features suggestive of critical findings and provides case-level output available in the PACS/workstation or triage. As a passive notification for prioritization-only software tool within standard of care workflow, Lunit INSIGHT CXR Triage does not send a proactive alert directly to the appropriately trained medical specialists. Lunit INSIGHT CXR Triage is not intention to specific portions of an image or to anomalies other than pleural effusion and or preumothorax. Its results are not intended to be used on a stand-alone basis for clinical decision-making.
The Indications for Use are similar and the Intended Use is the same.
# Technological Comparison
### 21 CFR 807.92(a)(6)
The subject device (SmartChest) and the predicate device (Lunit INSIGHT CXR) are both radiological computer assisted prioritization notification software. The technologies use artificial intelligence algorithms to analyze radiological images.
The subject and predicate devices share similar technological characteristics as follows: - target population, intended user and use environment, anatomical site and modality, means of notification, standalone performance level, and triage effectiveness.
All outputs are the same between the subject device and the primary device.
The only difference is related to the predicate device being able to connect to radiological imaging equipment and in parallel also connecting to PACS. The subject device only connects to the PACS (or other DICOM storage platforms) and flags cases there.
These differences do not change or modify the risks associated with the device type nor does it raise new questions of safety or effectiveness.
Both the subject device and predicate device are only intended to passively notify the end user that a study is suspicious of the indicated findings and enable them to prioritize those studies, but the end user is still required to review all images and make the find clinical diagnosis.
# Non-Clinical and/or Clinical Tests Summary & Conclusions 21 CFR 807.92(b)
### 21 CFR 807.92(a)(5)
{6}------------------------------------------------
Safety and performance of the SmartChest product has been evaluated and verified in accordance with software specifications and applicable performance standards through software verification testing. Additionally, the software validation activities were performed in accordance with IEC 62304:2006/ A1:2016 - Medical device software - Software life cycle processes, in addition to the FDA Guidance documents, "Guidance for the Content of Premarket Submissions for Software in Medical Devices" and "Content of Premarket Submission for Management of Cybersecurity in Medical Devices."
#### Standalone Performance Testing
Two individual standalone performance assessment studies to evaluate the effectiveness of SmartChest. The studies were conducted on a dataset representative of the US population. This performance test data set was obtained from sites that were different from the training data sites and the independence of the test data from training data. Each study was conducted on a dataset of 300 Chest X-Ray cases of transitional adolescent (18-21 years and older) US subjects obtained from multiple institutions across the US. The presence or absence of pneumothorax and pleural effusion was established by three ABR-certified radiologists with a minimum of 5 years of experience in cardiologists independently interpreted each case and the third radiologist independently reviewed the cases where there was disagreement between the first two. The final reference standard was determined by majority consensus.
The evaluated performance metrics were similar to the predicate device: ROC AUC, Sensitivity, and mean execution time (time from submission of the CXR case to the provision of an output as a notfication). For pneumothorax, the results are as follows: ROC AUC 0.989 [0.978; 0.997], Sensitivity 92.7% [95% Cl: 87.4-96.2], and Specificity 97.3% [95% Cl:33.4-99.1], Mean execution time of 2.322 ± 0.267 seconds on a local server and 28.542 ± 8.254 seconds on a cloud server. The dataset consisted of male (167 cases) and female (133 cases) and included an age range from 18 years . Images were obtained from rural (49) and urban (251) sites from across New York, North Carolina. Texas, and elsewhere. The dataset was obtained from various imaging s and included AP (115 cases) and PA views (160 cases).
For pleural effusion, the results were as follows: ROC AUC 0.975 (0.960; 0.987). Sensitivity 93.3% (95% Cl: 88.1-96.4), Specificity 90.0% (95% C): 84.1-94.11, Mean execution time of 2.288 ± 0.165 seconds on a local server and 28.257 ± 7.226 seconds on a cloud server. The dataset consisted of male (158 cases) and included an age range from 18 years to above 65 years. Images were obtained from rural (53) and urban (247) sites from across New York, North Carolina, Texas, Washington, and elsewhere. The dataset was obtained from various imaging system manufacturers and included AP (105 cases).
In Summary, the SmartChest device performed successfully in the clinical pivotal studies. Standalone detection performance and execution time for pleural effusion and pneumothorax were adequate as compared to the predicate device can therefore be considered as safe and effective as the predicate device.
Based on the information submitted in this premarket notifications for use, technological characteristics and performance testing, the SmartChest product raises no new questions of safety and is substantially equivalent to the predicate device in terms of safety, effectiveness, and performance.
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.