The MTS (MIC Test Strip) Aztreonam-Avibactam 0.016/4-256/4 µg/mL is a quantitative method intended for in vitro determination of antimicrobial susceptibility of bacteria. MTS consists of specialized paper impregnated with a predefined concentration gradient of an antimicrobial agent, which is used to determine the minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) in µg/mL of antimicrobial agents against bacteria as tested on agar media using overnight incubation and manual reading procedures. MTS Aztreonam-Avibactam at concentrations of 0.016/4-256/4 µg/mL should be interpreted at 16-20 hours of incubation. Testing with MTS Aztreonam-Avibactam at concentrations of 0.016/4-256/4 µg/mL is indicated for Enterobacterales as recognized by the FDA Susceptibility Test Interpretive Criteria (STIC). The MTS Aztreonam-Avibactam 0.016/4-256/4 µg/mL has demonstrated acceptable performance with the following organisms: Enterobacterales (Citrobacter freundii complex, Enterobacter cloacae complex, Escherichia coli, Klebsiella oxytoca, Klebsiella pneumoniae, and Serratia marcescens)
Device Story
MTS Aztreonam-Avibactam is a quantitative antimicrobial susceptibility test (AST) strip; consists of high-quality paper impregnated with a fixed concentration of avibactam (4 µg/mL) and a predefined exponential gradient of aztreonam. Used in clinical laboratories; manual procedure. Inoculated agar plates are incubated for 16-20 hours at 35°C. Principle: antimicrobial agent diffuses into agar, forming a symmetrical inhibition ellipse. User manually reads the MIC value at the intersection of the ellipse and the strip. Provides MIC in µg/mL to guide clinical decision-making regarding antibiotic therapy. Benefits patient by determining susceptibility of bacterial isolates to aztreonam-avibactam.
Clinical Evidence
Bench testing only. Performance evaluated using 686 clinical and challenge isolates of Enterobacterales across three sites. Compared to CLSI broth microdilution reference method. Results: 96.7% Essential Agreement (EA) and 97.8% Category Agreement (CA). Minor errors: 14; major errors: 1 (0.15%); very major errors: 0. Reproducibility: 96.3% within ± one doubling dilution. Quality control testing met acceptance criteria (≥95% within range).
Technological Characteristics
High-quality paper strip impregnated with predefined concentration gradient of aztreonam and fixed concentration of avibactam (4 µg/mL). Manual reading of inhibition ellipse on Mueller Hinton agar. Incubation: 35°C ±2°C for 16-20 hours. Single-use. No electronic components or software algorithms.
Indications for Use
Indicated for in vitro antimicrobial susceptibility testing of Enterobacterales (Citrobacter freundii complex, Enterobacter cloacae complex, Escherichia coli, Klebsiella oxytoca, Klebsiella pneumoniae, and Serratia marcescens) to determine the minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) of aztreonam-avibactam.
Regulatory Classification
Identification
An antimicrobial susceptibility test powder is a device that consists of an antimicrobial drug powder packaged in vials in specified amounts and intended for use in clinical laboratories for determining in vitro susceptibility of bacterial pathogens to these therapeutic agents. Test results are used to determine the antimicrobial agent of choice in the treatment of bacterial diseases.
{0}
FDA U.S. FOOD & DRUG ADMINISTRATION
# 510(k) SUBSTANTIAL EQUIVALENCE DETERMINATION DECISION SUMMARY
ASSAY ONLY
## I Background Information:
A 510(k) Number
K252114
B Applicant
Liofilchem s. r. l.
C Proprietary and Established Names
MTS Aztreonam-Avibactam 0.016/4 - 256/4 µg/mL
D Regulatory Information
| Product Code(s) | Classification | Regulation Section | Panel |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| JWY | Class II | 21 CFR 866.1640 - Antimicrobial Susceptibility Test Powder | MI - Microbiology |
## II Submission/Device Overview:
### A Purpose for Submission:
In this Traditional 510(k) submission, Liofilchem seeks the following:
1. To obtain a substantial equivalence determination for the Liofilchem MIC Test Strip (MTS) with aztreonam-avibactam at concentrations of 0.016/4 to 256/4 µg/mL.
2. To establish a Predetermined Change Control Plan (PCCP) to address future revisions to device labeling in response to breakpoint changes that are recognized on the FDA STIC webpage.
### B Measurand:
Aztreonam-avibactam in the dilution range of 0.016/4 to 256/4 µg/mL
### C Type of Test:
Quantitative antimicrobial susceptibility test (AST) growth-based detection
Food and Drug Administration
10903 New Hampshire Avenue
Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002
www.fda.gov
{1}
III Intended Use/Indications for Use:
A Intended Use(s):
See Indications for Use below.
B Indication(s) for Use:
The MTS (MIC Test Strip) Aztreonam-Avibactam 0.016/4-256/4 µg/mL is a quantitative method intended for in vitro determination of antimicrobial susceptibility of bacteria. MTS consists of specialized paper impregnated with a predefined concentration gradient of an antimicrobial agent, which is used to determine the minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) in µg/mL of antimicrobial agents against bacteria as tested on agar media using overnight incubation and manual reading procedures. MTS Aztreonam-Avibactam at concentrations of 0.016/4-256/4 µg/mL should be interpreted at 16-20 hours of incubation.
Testing with MTS Aztreonam-Avibactam at concentrations of 0.016/4-256/4 µg/mL is indicated for Enterobacterales as recognized by the FDA Susceptibility Test Interpretive Criteria (STIC).
The MTS Aztreonam-Avibactam 0.016/4-256/4 µg/mL has demonstrated acceptable performance with the following organisms:
Enterobacterales (Citrobacter freundii complex, Enterobacter cloacae complex, Escherichia coli, Klebsiella oxytoca, Klebsiella pneumoniae, and Serratia marcescens)
C Special Conditions for Use Statement(s):
Rx - For Prescription Use Only
The ability of the MTS Aztreonam-Avibactam to detect the following resistant isolates is unknown because an insufficient number of resistant isolates were available at the time of comparative testing. If such a strain is observed, it should be submitted to a reference laboratory.
Aztreonam-Avibactam: K. pneumoniae, E. cloacae complex, C. freundii complex, K. oxytoca, and S. marcescens
D Special Instrument Requirements:
N/A – Manual reading only
IV Device/System Characteristics:
A Device Description:
MTS Aztreonam-Avibactam 0.016/4-256/4 µg/mL is made of special high-quality paper impregnated with avibactam at a fixed concentration of 4 µg/mL and a predefined concentration gradient of aztreonam across 15 two-fold dilutions like those used by conventional MIC methods. One side of the strip is labeled with the aztreonam-avibactam code (AZA) and the MIC
K252114 - Page 2 of 10
{2}
reading scale in $\mu \mathrm{g} / \mathrm{mL}$. MIC values are determined by identifying the drug concentration at which growth of the ellipse ends. The MIC Test Strip (MTS) is single use only.
## B Principle of Operation:
MTS are made of specialized high-quality paper impregnated with a predefined concentration gradient of antibiotic, across 15 two-fold dilutions like those of a conventional MIC method. When the MTS is applied onto an inoculated agar surface, the preformed exponential gradient of antimicrobial agent diffuses into the agar. After 16-20 hours incubation, a symmetrical inhibition ellipse centered along the strip is formed. The MIC is read manually directly from the scale in terms of $\mu \mathrm{g} / \mathrm{mL}$ at the point where the edge of the inhibition ellipse intersects the strip MTS.
Growth along the entire gradient (i.e., no inhibition ellipse) indicates that the MIC value is greater than or equal to $(\geq)$ the highest value on the scale. An inhibition ellipse that intersects below the lower end of the scale is read as less than $(<)$ the lowest value. An MIC of 0.125 $\mu \mathrm{g} / \mathrm{mL}$ is considered to be the same as $0.12\mu \mathrm{g} / \mathrm{mL}$ for reporting purposes.
An MTS MIC value which falls between standard two-fold dilutions must be rounded up to the next standard upper two-fold value before categorization.
## V Substantial Equivalence Information:
### A Predicate Device Name(s):
Liofilchem MIC Test Strip (MTS)-Vancomycin 0.016 -256 ug/mL
### B Predicate 510(k) Number(s):
K153687
### C Comparison with Predicate(s):
| Device & Predicate Device(s): | Device: K252114 | Predicate: K153687 |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Device Trade Name | MTS Aztreonam-Avibactam 0.016/4-256/4 μg/mL | Liofilchem MIC Test Strip (MTS)-Vancomycin 0.016-256 μg/mL |
| General Device Characteristic Similarities | | |
| Plate Media | Mueller Hinton Agar | Same |
| MTS Strip Material | High quality paper impregnated with a predefined concentration of gradient antimicrobial agent | Same |
| Inoculation | Isolated colonies from culture in a suspension equivalent to 0.5 McFarland. Inoculum is applied to agar with swab manually. | Same |
| Reading | Manual; Interpret the MIC as | Same |
K252114 - Page 3 of 10
{3}
| Device & Predicate Device(s): | Device: K252114 | Predicate: K153687 |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | 100% inhibition | |
| Result | MIC in μg/mL | Same |
| General Device Characteristic Differences | | |
| Intended Use/Indications for Use | Quantitative susceptibility to antimicrobial agents against specified gram-negative organisms | Quantitative susceptibility to antimicrobial agents against specified gram-positive organisms |
| Antimicrobial Agent | Aztreonam-Avibactam (AZA) | Vancomycin (VA) |
| Incubation | 35°C ± 2°C for 16-20 hours | 35°C ± 2°C for 24 hours |
VI Standards/Guidance Documents Referenced:
- Class II Special Controls Guidance Document: Antimicrobial Susceptibility Test (AST) Systems; Guidance for Industry and FDA (August 2009).
- CLSI M07-Ed12. Methods for Dilution Antimicrobial Susceptibility Tests for Bacteria that Grow Aerobically (March 2024).
- CLSI M100-Ed35. Performance Standards for Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing (January 2025).
VII Performance Characteristics (if/when applicable):
A Analytical Performance:
1. Precision/Reproducibility:
Reproducibility testing of the Liofilchem MIC Test Strip (MTS) Aztreonam-Avibactam was performed using 10 Enterobacterales isolates (3 K. pneumoniae, 2 E. coli, 2 E. cloacae, 1 C. freundii, 1 S. marcescens, and 1 K. oxytoca). Testing was performed in triplicate at three sites on three separate days for a total of 270 data points (10 isolates x 3 replicates x 3 days of testing = 90 data points/site). Results were used to determine site to site and overall reproducibility.
The mode MIC value was pre-determined for each organism and the reproducibility was calculated based on the number of MIC values that fell within ± one doubling dilution of the mode. All MIC results were on scale. The results for overall reproducibility of MTS Aztreonam-Avibactam were 96.3% for all isolates of Enterobacterales that were within one doubling dilution of the mode MIC determined by the reference broth microdilution method. The results are acceptable.
2. Linearity:
Not applicable.
K252114 - Page 4 of 10
{4}
3. Analytical Specificity/Interference:
Not applicable.
4. Assay Reportable Range:
Not applicable.
5. Traceability, Stability, Expected Values (Controls, Calibrators, or Methods):
Inoculum Density Check:
The inoculum is prepared from an overnight agar plate into saline to achieve turbidity equivalent to a 0.5 McFarland standard. The inoculum is applied to agar with a sterile swab manually. Colony counts are performed periodically at each site for all QC replicates.
Inoculum density checks were performed, and the colony counts obtained for each QC strain were within the recommended range of approximately 1 x 10⁸ CFU/mL. Colony counts are also determined from one replicate of each reproducibility isolate on each of the three days of testing and from a minimum of 10% of the clinical strains tested and showed similar ranges.
Purity Checks:
Purity checks are performed on all isolates following MTS inoculation. All isolates were determined to be pure in both the broth microdilution reference panels and the MTS agar plates.
Growth Rate:
All clinical and challenge isolates grew in both the reference broth microdilution panels and the MTS agar plates.
Quality Control:
The CLSI-recommended quality control (QC) strain Klebsiella pneumoniae ATCC 700603 and CLSI QC strains Escherichia coli ATCC 25922 and Escherichia coli ATCC 35218 were tested at three sites for a minimum of 20 times at each site by both the MTS and the reference method. The results demonstrate that MTS Aztreonam-Avibactam can produce quality control results in the recommended range ≥95% of the time which is acceptable (Table 1).
Table 1. QC Results for Aztreonam-Avibactam with CLSI Recommended QC Strains
| QC Organism | Concentration (μg/mL) | Reference BMD (All Sites) | MTS (All Sites) |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| E. coli ATCC 25922
Expected Results: 0.03/4-0.12/4 μg/mL | 0.015 | | |
| | 0.03 | | 15 |
| | 0.06 | 66 | 54 |
| | 0.12 | 3 | |
| | 0.25 | | |
| E. coli ATCC 35218 | 0.008 | | |
| | 0.016 | 2 | 21 |
K252114 - Page 5 of 10
{5}
| QC Organism | Concentration (μg/mL) | Reference BMD (All Sites) | MTS (All Sites) |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Expected Results: 0.016/4-0.06/4 μg/mL | 0.03 | 41 | 48 |
| | 0.06 | 26 | |
| | 0.12 | | |
| K. pneumoniae ATCC 700603 | 0.03 | | |
| | 0.06 | | |
| | 0.12 | 14 | 21 |
| Expected Results: 0.06/4-0.5/4 μg/mL | 0.25 | 55 | 47 |
| | 0.5 | | 1 |
| | 1 | | |
ATCC=American Type Culture Collection
6. Detection Limit:
Not applicable.
7. Assay Cut-Off:
Not applicable.
B Comparison Studies:
1. Method Comparison with Predicate Device:
Results obtained with Liofilchem MTS with Aztreonam-Avibactam were compared to results obtained from frozen reference MIC panels. Reference MIC panels are prepared, tested, and interpreted as outlined in the CLSI document M07-Ed12.
Isolated colonies from an overnight agar plate were suspended in saline to achieve a 0.5 McFarland standard turbidity (approximately 10⁸ CFU/mL). Testing conditions consisted of incubation of the inoculated Mueller Hinton agar plate in an inverted position at 35°C ±2°C for 16-20 hours. At the end of the appropriate incubation, the MIC value where the edge of the inhibition ellipse intersects the strip was compared to MIC results obtained with the CLSI reference broth microdilution method.
Clinical:
Clinical testing was performed at two external U.S. sites and one internal outside U.S. site with both MTS Aztreonam-Avibactam and the reference method. A total of 591 Enterobacteriales clinical isolates were evaluated including: 227 E. coli, 219 K. pneumoniae, 55 E. cloacae, 30 C. freundii, 30 K. oxytoca, and 30 S. marcescens isolates. The clinical testing included 192 (32.5%) contemporary isolates (isolated no longer than 6 months prior to testing) and 399 (67.5%) stock isolates (isolated over 6 months prior to testing).
K252114 - Page 6 of 10
{6}
Challenge:
Challenge testing was performed at one external U.S. site. A total of 95 challenge isolates (25 E. coli, 25 K. pneumoniae, 15 E. cloacae, 10 C. freundii, 10 K. oxytoca, and 10 S. marcescens) were evaluated.
Results of MTS Aztreonam-Avibactam testing with clinical and challenge isolates are shown in Table 2.
Table 2. Overall Performance of MTS Aztreonam-Avibactam with Clinical and Challenge Isolates
| | Tot | EA N | EA % | Eval Tot | Eval EA N | Eval EA % | CA Tot | CA % | No. R | No. S | min | major | vmj |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Enterobacterales [≤4/4 (S), 8/4 (I), ≥16/4 (R)] | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Clinical | 591 | 570 | 96.5 | 555 | 534 | 96.2 | 583 | 98.7 | 10 | 578 | 7 | 1 | 0 |
| Challenge | 95 | 93 | 97.9 | 93 | 91 | 97.9 | 88 | 92.6 | 6 | 83 | 7 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 686 | 663 | 96.7 | 648 | 625 | 96.5 | 671 | 97.8 | 16 | 661 | 14 | 1 | 0 |
EA – Essential Agreement
CA – Category Agreement
EVAL – Evaluable MIC results
S – Susceptible
min – Minor discrepancies
maj – Manor discrepancies
vmj – Very major discrepancies
R – Resistant
Essential Agreement (EA) is when the Liofilchem MIC Test Strip (MTS) results agree exactly or within one doubling dilution of the reference broth microdilution results. Category Agreement (CA) is when the Liofilchem MIC Test Strip (MTS) result interpretation agrees exactly with the reference broth microdilution result interpretation.
For Enterobacterales, the combined clinical and challenge results (686 isolates) were acceptable with an EA of 96.7% and CA of 97.8%. There were 14 minor errors, one major error (0.15%, 1/661), and no very major errors.
For clinical and challenge isolates tested with the Liofilchem MTS Aztreonam-Avibactam 0.016/4-256/4 µg/mL, the overall % EA and % CA meet the acceptance criteria.
MIC Trending Analysis:
Using the combined clinical and challenge data, an analysis of trending was conducted for all Enterobacterales isolates (Table 3). This trending calculation considers MIC values that are determined to be one or more doubling dilutions lower or higher compared to the reference method irrespective of whether the device MIC values are on-scale or not.
Species for which the difference between the percentage of isolates with higher vs. lower MIC readings was ≥ 30% and for which the confidence interval was determined to be statistically significant were considered to show evidence of trending. Trending that provides higher or lower MIC values compared to the reference is addressed in labeling.
No statistically significant trending with MTS Aztreonam-Avibactam (0.016/4-256/4 µg/mL) was observed when compared to the CLSI broth micro-dilution reference method, as summarized in Table 3.
K252114 - Page 7 of 10
{7}
Table 3. Observed Trending of Results Obtained with MTS Aztreonam-Avibactam
| Organism Name | Total Evaluable for Trending | ≥ 1 Dilution Lower No. (%) | Exact No. | ≥ 1 Dilution Higher No. (%) | Percent Difference (95% CI) | Trending Noted |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| C. freundii | 39 | 11, (28.2) | 22 | 6, (15.4) | -13% (-30%, 6%) | No |
| E. cloacae | 68 | 29, (42.7) | 27 | 12, (17.7) | -25% (-39%, -10%) | No |
| E. coli | 238 | 82, (34.5) | 105 | 51, (21.4) | -13% (-21%, -5%) | No |
| K. oxytoca | 39 | 12, (30.8) | 19 | 8, (20.5) | -10% (-29%, 9%) | No |
| K. pneumoniae | 241 | 65, (27.0) | 101 | 75, (31.1) | 4% (-4%, 12%) | No |
| S. marcescens | 40 | 15, (37.5) | 17 | 8, (20) | -18% (-36%, 2%) | No |
## Resistant Isolates:
A total of 686 clinical and challenge isolates were tested for Enterobacterales and 16 (2.3%) resistant isolates were available for testing. Due to the insufficient number of resistant K. pneumoniae, E. cloacae, C. freundii, K. oxytoca, and S. marcescens isolates evaluated, the following limitation is included in the device labeling:
The ability of the MTS Aztreonam-Avibactam to detect the following resistant isolates is unknown because an insufficient number of resistant isolates were available at the time of comparative testing. If such a strain is observed, it should be submitted to a reference laboratory.
Aztreonam-Avibactam: K. pneumoniae, E. cloacae complex, C. freundii complex, K. oxytoca, and S. marcescens
## Resistance Mechanism in Challenge Isolates:
Challenge isolates of Enterobacterales harboring various molecular mechanisms of resistance were evaluated with MTS Aztreonam-Avibactam 0.016/4 - 256/4 µg/mL. The following mechanisms were evaluated: aac(3), aac(6'), aadA, aadB, ACT, AmpC, aph(3'), armA, ARR3, catA1, catB3, cmlA1, CMY, CTX-M, dfrA, DHA, ESBL, fosA, FOX-5, IMI-4, IMP, KPC, LEN, MBL, MIR-16, mph(A), msr(E), NDM, oqxAB, OXA, OXY, pbp3, rmtC, rmtF, SHV, SME, str, sul, TEM, tet, and VIM alleles.
## Testing/Reporting Non-Indicated Species:
For this review, the interpretative criteria are applied to the organisms/organism groups according to the FDA STIC website. As required under 511A(2)(2)(B) of the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act, the following statement is added in the precautions section of labeling:
Per the FDA-Recognized Susceptibility Test Interpretive Criteria website, the safety and efficacy of antimicrobial drugs for which antimicrobial susceptibility is tested by this AST device, may or may not have been established in adequate and well-controlled clinical trials for treating clinical infections due to microorganisms outside of those found in the indications and usage in the drug label. The clinical significance of susceptibility information in those instances is unknown. The approved labelling for specific antimicrobial drugs provides the uses for which the antimicrobial drug is approved.
## 2. Matrix Comparison:
Not applicable.
K252114 - Page 8 of 10
{8}
# 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:
The FDA-recognized susceptibility interpretive criteria for aztreonam-avibactam are listed in Table 4.
Table 4. FDA-Recognized Interpretive Criteria for Aztreonam-Avibactam
| Organism | Minimum Inhibitory Concentration (μg/mL)a | | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | Susceptible (S) | Intermediate (I) | Resistant (R) |
| Enterobacterales | ≤ 4/4 | 8/4 | ≥ 16/4 |
a According to the FDA STIC Webpage, https://www.fda.gov/drugs/development-resources/fda-recognized-antimicrobial-susceptibility-test-interpretive-criteria
# 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.
To support the implementation of changes to FDA-recognized susceptibility test interpretive criteria (i.e., breakpoints), this submission included a breakpoint change protocol that was reviewed and accepted by FDA. This protocol addresses future revisions to device labeling in response to breakpoint changes that are recognized on the FDA STIC webpage (https://www.fda.gov/Drugs/DevelopmentApprovalProcess/DevelopmentResources/ucm410971.htm). The protocol outlined the specific procedures and acceptance criteria that Liofilchem intends to use to evaluate the MTS Aztreonam-Avibactam 0.016/4-256/4 μg/mL when revised breakpoints for aztreonam-avibactam are published on the FDA STIC webpage. The breakpoint change protocol included with the submission indicated that if specific criteria are met, Liofilchem will update the MTS Aztreonam-Avibactam 0.016/4-256/4 μg/mL device label to
K252114 - Page 9 of 10
{9}
include (1) the new breakpoints, (2) an updated performance section after re-evaluation of data in this premarket notification with the new breakpoints, and (3) any new limitations as determined by their evaluation.
K252114 - Page 10 of 10
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.