K233216 · Clew Medical , Ltd. · QNL · Jan 13, 2024 · Cardiovascular
Device Facts
Record ID
K233216
Device Name
CLEWICU System
Applicant
Clew Medical , Ltd.
Product Code
QNL · Cardiovascular
Decision Date
Jan 13, 2024
Decision
SESE
Submission Type
Traditional
Regulation
21 CFR 870.2210
Device Class
Class 2
Attributes
AI/ML, Software as a Medical Device, PCCP, Real-World Evidence
Real-World Evidence
Submission
Device
Sponsor
RWD Sources
RWE Use Summary
Key Tags
K233216 · Jan 13, 2024
CLEWICU System
Clew Medical , Ltd.
University of Massachusetts eICU dataset; MIMIC-III dataset
Retrospective cohort study using existing clinical datasets to validate the performance of the CLEWICU models after retraining with a reduced set of input features.
Retrospective cohort; Model validation; EHR data; Critical care
Clinical Evidence
Study Design
Population
Comparator
Key Endpoints
Model validation study; Retrospective cohort study; Follow-up/Duration: From start of patient stay through discharge
Patients in hospital critical care settings; Sample Size: UMass: 6,534 unique patient stays; MIMIC-III: 5,069 unique patient stays; Number of Sites: 2 separate health care systems (datasets)
Not applicable for this study
Sensitivity/TPR and PPV for CLEWHI model; Specificity/TNR and Sensitivity/TPR for CLEWLR model
Retrospective cohort study using University of Massachusetts eICU dataset (6534 patient stays) and MIMIC-III dataset (5069 patient stays)
—
Indications for Use
CLEWICU provides the clinician with physiological insight into a patient's likelihood of future hemodynamic instability. CLEWICU is intended for use in hospital critical care settings for patients 18 years and over. CLEWICU is considered to provide additional information regarding the patient's predicted future risk for clinical deterioration, as well as identifying patients at low risk for deterioration. The product predictions are for reference only and no therapeutic decisions should be made based solely on the CLEWICU predictions.
Device Story
CLEWICU is a stand-alone analytical software system (ClewICUServer and ClewICUnitor) for hospital critical care. It ingests patient data via HL7 from EHRs and bedside monitors. Machine learning models process this data to calculate two indices: CLEWHI (likelihood of hemodynamic instability requiring vasopressor/inotrope support) and CLEWLR (low risk for deterioration). The ClewICUnitor web interface displays these indices and notifications to clinicians. The system provides predictive insights for the next 8 hours to assist in clinical decision-making; it is for reference only and does not replace clinical judgment. It benefits patients by identifying potential deterioration or low-risk status, allowing for proactive care management.
Clinical Evidence
Retrospective cohort study using UMass (6,534 stays) and MIMIC-III (5,069 stays) datasets. Models evaluated for CLEWHI (hemodynamic instability) and CLEWLR (low risk). CLEWHI results: UMass sensitivity 63%, specificity 93%, PPV 12%; MIMIC sensitivity 69%, specificity 87%, PPV 10%. CLEWLR results: UMass sensitivity 47%, specificity 90.5%; MIMIC sensitivity 35.5%, specificity 90%. Results met pre-defined performance criteria.
Technological Characteristics
Analytical software-only device; runs on user-provided server or cloud infrastructure. Uses machine learning models trained on 50 input features. Connectivity via HL7 for EHR and patient monitor data integration. Software developed per IEC 62304:2015-06.
Indications for Use
Indicated for patients 18 years and older in hospital critical care settings (ICU, ED critical care/resuscitation, PACU, step-down, post-surgical, cardiac, neurocritical, or high-dependency units) to provide physiological insight into future hemodynamic instability risk and identify low-risk patients.
Regulatory Classification
Identification
The adjunctive predictive cardiovascular indicator is a prescription device that uses software algorithms to analyze cardiovascular vital signs and predict future cardiovascular status or events. This device is intended for adjunctive use with other physical vital sign parameters and patient information and is not intended to independently direct therapy.
Special Controls
*Classification.* Class II (special controls). The special controls for this device are:(1) A software description and the results of verification and validation testing based on a comprehensive hazard analysis and risk assessment must be provided, including:
(i) A full characterization of the software technical parameters, including algorithms;
(ii) A description of the expected impact of all applicable sensor acquisition hardware characteristics and associated hardware specifications;
(iii) A description of sensor data quality control measures;
(iv) A description of all mitigations for user error or failure of any subsystem components (including signal detection, signal analysis, data display, and storage) on output accuracy;
(v) A description of the expected time to patient status or clinical event for all expected outputs, accounting for differences in patient condition and environment; and
(vi) The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value in both percentage and number form.
(2) A scientific justification for the validity of the predictive cardiovascular indicator algorithm(s) must be provided. This justification must include verification of the algorithm calculations and validation using an independent data set.
(3) A human factors and usability engineering assessment must be provided that evaluates the risk of misinterpretation of device output.
(4) A clinical data assessment must be provided. This assessment must fulfill the following:
(i) The assessment must include a summary of the clinical data used, including source, patient demographics, and any techniques used for annotating and separating the data.
(ii) The clinical data must be representative of the intended use population for the device. Any selection criteria or sample limitations must be fully described and justified.
(iii) The assessment must demonstrate output consistency using the expected range of data sources and data quality encountered in the intended use population and environment.
(iv) The assessment must evaluate how the device output correlates with the predicted event or status.
(5) Labeling must include:
(i) A description of what the device measures and outputs to the user;
(ii) Warnings identifying sensor acquisition factors that may impact measurement results;
(iii) Guidance for interpretation of the measurements, including a statement that the output is adjunctive to other physical vital sign parameters and patient information;
(iv) A specific time or a range of times before the predicted patient status or clinical event occurs, accounting for differences in patient condition and environment;
(v) Key assumptions made during calculation of the output;
(vi) The type(s) of sensor data used, including specification of compatible sensors for data acquisition;
(vii) The expected performance of the device for all intended use populations and environments; and
(viii) Relevant characteristics of the patients studied in the clinical validation (including age, gender, race or ethnicity, and patient condition) and a summary of validation results.
{0}------------------------------------------------
Image /page/0/Picture/0 description: The image shows 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 logo on the right. The FDA logo is in blue and includes the letters "FDA" followed by the words "U.S. Food & Drug Administration".
January 13, 2024
Clew Medical Ltd. % Sheila Hemeon-Heyer President Heyer Regulatory Solutions 125 Cherry Lane Amherst, Massachusetts 01002
Re: K233216
Trade/Device Name: CLEWICU System Regulation Number: 21 CFR 870.2210 Regulation Name: Adjunctive Predictive Cardiovascular Indicator Regulatory Class: Class II Product Code: QNL Dated: December 14, 2023 Received: December 14, 2023
Dear Sheila Hemeon-Heyer:
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.
FDA's substantial equivalence determination also included the review and clearance of your Predetermined Change Control Plan (PCCP). Under section 515C(b)(1) of the Act, a new premarket notification is not required for a change to a device cleared under section 510(k) of the Act, if such change is consistent with an
{1}------------------------------------------------
established PCCP granted pursuant to section 515C(b)(2) of the Act. Under 21 CFR 807.81(a)(3), a new premarket notification is required if there is a major change or modification in the intended use of a device, or if there is a change or modification in a device that could significantly affect the safety or effectiveness of the device, e.g., a significant change or modification in design, material, chemical composition, energy source, or manufacturing process. Accordingly, if deviations from the established PCCP result in a major change or modification in the intended use of the device, or result in a change or modification in the device that could significantly affect the safety or effectiveness of the a new premarket notification would be required consistent with section 515C(b)(1) of the Act and 21 CFR 807.81(a)(3). Failure to submit such a premarket submission would constitute adulteration and misbranding under sections 501(f)(1)(B) and 502(o) of the Act, respectively.
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).
Your device is also subject to, among other requirements, the Quality System (OS) 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 QS 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-regulatory
{2}------------------------------------------------
assistance/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,
# Stephen C. Browning -S
LCDR Stephen Browning Assistant Director Division of Cardiac Electrophysiology, Diagnostics, and Monitoring Devices Office of Cardiovascular Devices Office of Product Evaluation and Quality Center for Devices and Radiological Health
Enclosure
{3}------------------------------------------------
# Indications for Use
510(k) Number (if known) K233216
Device Name
CLEWICU System
### Indications for Use (Describe)
CLEWICU provides the clinician with physiological insight into a patient's likelihood of future hemodynamic instability. CLEWICU is intended for use in hospital care settings for patients 18 years and over. CLEWICU is considered to provide additional information regarding the patient's predicted future risk for clinical deterioration, as well as identifying patients at low risk for deterioration. The productions are for reference only and no therapeutic decisions should be made based solely on the CLEWICU predictions.
| Type of Use (Select one or both, as applicable) | | |
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| <table><tr><td><div> <span> <span style="font-size:16px">☒</span> Prescription Use (Part 21 CFR 801 Subpart D) </span> </div></td><td><div> <span> <span style="font-size:16px">☐</span> Over-The-Counter Use (21 CFR 801 Subpart C) </span> </div></td></tr></table> | <div> <span> <span style="font-size:16px">☒</span> Prescription Use (Part 21 CFR 801 Subpart D) </span> </div> | <div> <span> <span style="font-size:16px">☐</span> Over-The-Counter Use (21 CFR 801 Subpart C) </span> </div> |
| <div> <span> <span style="font-size:16px">☒</span> Prescription Use (Part 21 CFR 801 Subpart D) </span> </div> | <div> <span> <span style="font-size:16px">☐</span> Over-The-Counter Use (21 CFR 801 Subpart C) </span> </div> | |
### 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."
{4}------------------------------------------------
### K233216
### 510(k) Summary
This summary of 510(k) safety and effectiveness information is being submitted in accordance with the requirements of 21 CFR 807.92.
- 510(k) Applicant: A. CLEW Medical, Ltd. 5 Hamelacha St. Netanya Israel 4206002
Contact: Avigdor Faians Phone: +972-9-779-5995 Email: avi.f(@clewmed.com
- B. Date Prepared: January 12, 2024
#### D. Device Name and Classification Information:
| Trade name: | CLEWICU System |
|----------------------------|------------------------------------------------|
| Common name: | Future Health Condition Prediction Software |
| Classification name: | Adjunctive Predictive Cardiovascular Indicator |
| Classification regulation: | 21 CFR 870.2210 |
| Product Code: | QNL |
| Class: | II |
- E. Predicate Device(s): K200717 CLEWICU System
#### Device Description: ட
The CLEWICU System is a stand-alone analytical software product that includes the ClewICUServer and the ClewICUnitor. It uses models derived from machine learning to calculate the likelihood of occurrence of certain clinically significant events for patients in hospital critical care settings including:
- Intensive Care Unit (ICU) .
- . Emergency Department's (ED) Critical Care or Resuscitation area
- Post-Anesthesia Care Unit (PACU) .
- . Step-Down Unit
- Post-Surgical Recovery Unit .
- . Other Specialized Care Units (e.g., Cardiac Care Unit (CCU), Neurocritical Care Unit (NCU), High-dependency Care Unit (HDU)
{5}------------------------------------------------
### K233216
ClewICUServer and ClewICUnitor are software-only devices that are run on a user-provided server or cloud-infrastructure.
The ClewICUServer is a backend software platform that imports patient data from various sources including Electronic Health Record (EHR) data and patient monitoring devices through an HL7 data connection. The data are then used by models operating within the ClewICUServer to compute and store the CLEWHI index (likelihood of hemodynamic instability requiring vasopressor / inotrope support), and CLEWLR (indication that the patient is at "low risk" for deterioration).
The ClewICUnitor is the web-based user interface displaying CLEWHI, and CLEWLR associated notifications and related measures, as well as presenting the overall unit status.
#### G. Indications for Use Statement:
CLEWICU provides the clinician with physiological insight into a patient's likelihood of future hemodynamic instability. CLEWICU is intended for use in hospital critical care settings for patients 18 years and over. CLEWICU is considered to provide additional information regarding the patient's predicted future risk for clinical deterioration, as well as identifying patients at low risk for deterioration. The product predictions are for reference only and no therapeutic decisions should be made based solely on the CLEWICU predictions.
| Parameter | Predicate Device<br>K200717 | Proposed Device | Comparison |
|----------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------|
| Device Trade Name | CLEWICU System | CLEWICU System | Same |
| Device Manufacturer | CLEW Medical Ltd. | CLEW Medical Ltd. | Same |
| Classification<br>regulation | 21 CFR 870.2210 | 21 CFR 870.2210 | Same |
| Product Code | QNL | QNL | Same |
| Indications for Use<br>Statement | CLEWICU provides the<br>clinician with physiological<br>insight into a patient's<br>likelihood of future<br>hemodynamic instability.<br>CLEWICU is intended for<br>use with intensive care unit<br>(ICU) patients 18 years and<br>over. CLEWICU is<br>considered to provide<br>additional information<br>regarding the patient's<br>predicted future risk for<br>clinical deterioration, as well | CLEWICU provides the<br>clinician with physiological<br>insight into a patient's<br>likelihood of future<br>hemodynamic instability.<br>CLEWICU is intended for<br>use in hospital critical care<br>settings for patients 18 years<br>and over. CLEWICU is<br>considered to provide<br>additional information<br>regarding the patient's<br>predicted future risk for<br>clinical deterioration, as well | Different<br>See note a |
#### H. Comparison with Predicate Device:
{6}------------------------------------------------
| Parameter | Predicate Device<br>K200717 | Proposed Device | Comparison |
|----------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------|
| | as identifying patients at low<br>risk for deterioration. The<br>product predictions are for<br>reference only and no<br>therapeutic decisions should<br>be made based solely on the<br>CLEWICU predictions. | as identifying patients at low<br>risk for deterioration. The<br>product predictions are for<br>reference only and no<br>therapeutic decisions should<br>be made based solely on the<br>CLEWICU predictions. | |
| Intended use<br>population | ICU patients ≥ 18 years | Critical care patients ≥ 18<br>years | Different, see<br>note a |
| Rx or OTC | Rx | Rx | Same |
| Product design | Analytical software product<br>that runs on user-provided<br>hardware. | Analytical software product<br>that runs on user-provided<br>hardware. | Same |
| Model features | Original set of 80 features | Reduced set of 50 features | Different<br>See note b |
#### Discussion of Differences .
Note a: During the initial installations of CLEWICU, hospitals have requested to be able to use the software in other critical care areas of the hospital in addition to the ICU. Therefore, the intended use environment of the indications for use statement is being broadened to allow use in all critical care areas of the hospital. This change does not impact the safety or effectiveness of CLEWICU because; 1) CLEWICU is housed on a networked server and is accessible in multiple areas of the hospital; 2) the level of training and experience of clinical staff in all critical care areas of the hospital is expected to be similar; and 3) the installation and training activities for CLEWICU will be the same regardless of where the system will be used in the hospital.
Note b: The purpose of this 510(k) is to demonstrate that the clinical performance of the CLEWICU system meets the same statistical criteria established under the prior 510(k) (K200717) after training the CLEWHI and CLEWLR models on a reduced set of input data (features). See below for the data demonstrating that CLEWICU with the reduced input dataset meets the established performance criteria and, therefore, does not impact the device safety or effectiveness.
## J. Summary of Data Submitted to Support Substantial Equivalence
The following testing was submitted to support this 510(k):
Software validation testing: Software development and testing was conducted in accordance with IEC 62304:2015-06 Medical device software - Software life cycle processes.
Model validation testing: A model validation study was conducted to demonstrate that the CLEWICU models continue to provide clinically acceptable performance after being re-trained
{7}------------------------------------------------
using a reduced set of features, i.e., input dataset. This was a retrospective cohort study that involved two separate health care systems, each evaluated independently. Data for patient stays came from the University of Massachusetts elCU dataset ("UMass", containing 6534 unique patient stays) and from the MIMIC-III dataset ("Mimic", containing 5069 unique patient stays). The models were exposed to the data from each patient stay in a temporal fashion from the start of each patient's stay through discharge. The models could generate notifications using only data that would have been available up to each timepoint under consideration; they could not see future data. Each notification was recorded with its timestamp.
The pre-defined performance criteria were the same as for the initial CLEWICU System:
### Primary endpoint:
The target point estimate for sensitivity/TPR for the CLEWHI model is 60%. The target point estimate for the specificity/TNR for the CLEWLR model is 90%.
### Secondary endpoints:
The target point estimate positive predictive value (PPV) for the CLEWHI model is 10%. The target point estimate sensitivity/TPR for the CLEWLR model is 25%.
### Results:
CLEWHI Model:
- UMASS: Sensitivity was 63% (95% Cl: 59-67%), Specificity was 93% (95%-. 94%), and PPPV was 12% (95% CI: 11-14%)
- MIMIC: Sensitivity was 69% (95% Cl: 66 73%), Specificity was 87% (95% Cl: 87%-. 88%), and PPV was 10% (95% Cl: 9 – 11%)
## CLEWLR Model:
- UMASS: Sensitivity was 47% (95% Cl: 46.8 47.2) and Specificity was 90.5% (95% Cl: . 89.6 – 91.4)
- MIMIC: Sensitivity was 35.5% (95% CI 35.3 35.7) and Specificity was 90% (95% CI . 89.1 - 80.9)
The model validation test results demonstrate that the clinical performance of the CLEWICU models continue to meet the pre-defined acceptance criteria after being trained with the reduced input data set.
#### K. Predetermined Change Control Plan (PCCP)
This 510(k) implements a PCCP to allow the CLEW models to be trained and validated for new input data sets following the same validation protocol and meeting the same performance criteria as were used to validate the CLEWICU models described in this 510(k). Due to differences in US hospital electronic medical record (EMR) systems and critical care patient monitoring protocols, CLEW anticipates that the CLEWICU models may need to be trained for
{8}------------------------------------------------
# K233216
hospitals that present: 1) reduced input data types or reduced frequency of data availability: or 2) additional input data types as compared to the models cleared under this 510(k). In addition, the PCCP allows the CLEWICU models to be trained with new datasets, as they become available, to increase the models' sensitivity while maintaining or improving the models' performance specifications.
New model development will follow the same CLEW protocols and procedures reviewed by FDA under this 510(k) for both in-house training and on-site system implementation and validation. New model development will always follow the strict process that requires one dataset for training and a different, completely independent, dataset for testing. Validation of new models developed under this PCCP will use patient data from at least three geographically diverse sites, and no one site's data will contribute more than 50% to the total validation dataset.
The validated new models must meet the same minimum required performance specifications as the cleared CLEWICU models:
For CLEWHI the required minimum sensitivity is 0.6 and PPV is 0.1. For CLEWLR the required minimum sensitivity is 0.25 fand SPC is 0.9.
New CLEWICU models may demonstrate improvement in the PPV/SPC, while the sensitivity remains within previous performance level and the lower bound of the 95% confidence interval of that measure to ensure that one or both improve after retraining. The PPV is dependent on the event prevalence, and its target will be adjusted accordingly.
The modifications allowed under this PCCP will not change the device indications for use or how the CLEWICU operates once the models are deployed at a hospital, including the user interface and the criteria for raising a notification of a potential hemodynamic event or determining that a patient is at low risk for a hemodynamic event, within the next 8 hours.
#### L. Conclusion
The differences between the predicate and the subject device do not raise any new or different questions of safety or effectiveness. The information and testing presented in this 510(k) demonstrate that the CLEWICU System is substantially equivalent to the predicate device cleared under K200717.
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.