Definition
Under Section 510(k) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, a manufacturer seeking to market a new Class II medical device must demonstrate that it is substantially equivalent to a predicate device - a legally marketed device already on the U.S. market. The FDA does not require the new device to be identical to the predicate; it must share the same intended use and have technological characteristics that do not raise new questions of safety or effectiveness.
Valid Predicate Devices
- Preamendment devices - devices commercially distributed in the United States before May 28, 1976, when the Medical Device Amendments were enacted.
- Previously cleared 510(k) devices - any device that has received a Substantially Equivalent determination from the FDA.
- De Novo classified devices - novel devices reclassified through the De Novo pathway, which can then serve as predicates for future 510(k) submissions.
Regulatory Context
Predicate selection is one of the most consequential strategic decisions in preparing a 510(k) submission. A poorly chosen predicate is a leading cause of Not Substantially Equivalent (NSE) determinations. The FDA evaluates substantial equivalence through a two-part test: first, whether the intended use is the same; second, whether technological differences raise new safety or effectiveness concerns.
Manufacturers may use multiple predicates simultaneously (a split predicate approach), citing one predicate for intended use and another for technological characteristics, though the FDA has signaled increasing scrutiny of this practice.
Predicate Device Use by FDA Panel
Predicate-based submissions are distributed across all 20 FDA panels. The following panels have the highest volume of published submissions in the 510k Database dataset - and therefore the deepest pool of available predicate devices:
| Panel | Submissions |
|---|---|
| Orthopedic | 2,467 |
| Radiology | 2,043 |
| General & Plastic Surgery | 1,872 |
| Cardiovascular | 1,416 |
| General Hospital | 1,374 |
Search all published 510(k) clearances to find predicate devices by device name, product code, or manufacturer.
Predicate Chaining
Because a cleared 510(k) device can itself serve as a predicate, it is possible to construct chains of predicates extending back to pre-1976 devices. A 2021 study in PLOS ONE by Hwang et al. mapped the genealogy of FDA predicate chains and found that some devices rely on predicates with contested safety records. See Predicate Chain for a full analysis.
Dataset Insights
| Metric | Value |
|---|---|
| Total 510(k) submissions in dataset | 166,200 |
| Clearances based on substantial equivalence | 165,719 (99.7%) |
| Not Substantially Equivalent determinations | 464 (0.28%) |
| Panels with highest NSE rates | Microbiology (62), Neurology (54), Gastroenterology (47) |
| Largest predicate pool by panel | Orthopedic (2,467 published), Radiology (2,043), Surgery (1,872) |
Real Examples
- K254066 - Etiometry Platform (Neurology, Special 510(k), 2026)
- K243854 - Contour Light (Surgery, linked clinical trial, 2024)
Browse cleared devices by panel: Cardiovascular - Orthopedic - Radiology
FDA References
- The 510(k) Program: Evaluating Substantial Equivalence in Premarket Notifications - FDA guidance, 2014
- FDA: Premarket Notification 510(k)
Related Terms
Substantial Equivalence - Predicate Chain - De Novo Classification - Not Substantially Equivalent - Third-Party Review