Cleared Traditional

K001981 - DIASTAT ANTI-CARDIOLIPIN IGA, MODEL FCAR 500 (FDA 510(k) Clearance)

Class II Immunology device cleared through predicate-based substantial equivalence - typically does not require clinical trials.

K001981 · Axis-Shield , Ltd. · Immunology device
Download Printable Device Report (PDF)
Optimized for regulatory review, auditing and printing
Aug 2000
Decision
53d
Days
Class 2
Risk

K001981 is an FDA 510(k) clearance for the DIASTAT ANTI-CARDIOLIPIN IGA, MODEL FCAR 500. Classified as System, Test, Anticardiolipin Immunological (product code MID), Class II - Special Controls.

Submitted by Axis-Shield , Ltd. (Dundee, GB). The FDA issued a Cleared decision on August 21, 2000 after a review of 53 days - a notably fast clearance cycle.

This device falls under the Immunology FDA review panel, regulated under 21 CFR 866.5660 - the FDA immunology device framework. The Traditional 510(k) pathway establishes clearance through substantial equivalence to a legally marketed predicate device, without requiring clinical trial data.

Device pattern: Fast-track predicate clearance. Standard predicate reliance. The short review cycle indicates strong predicate alignment - the FDA found sufficient equivalence without extended technical review.

View all Axis-Shield , Ltd. devices

Submission Details

510(k) Number K001981 FDA.gov
FDA Decision Cleared Substantially Equivalent - Traditional 510(k) (SESE)
Date Received June 29, 2000
Decision Date August 21, 2000
Days to Decision 53 days
Submission Type Traditional
Review Panel Immunology (IM)
Summary Statement
Third-party Review No - reviewed directly by FDA
Regulatory Context
Review time vs. panel average
51d faster than avg
Panel avg: 104d · This submission: 53d
Pathway characteristics
Predicate-based equivalence. No clinical trials required.

Device Classification

Product Code MID System, Test, Anticardiolipin Immunological
Device Class Class 2 - Special Controls
CFR Regulation 21 CFR 866.5660
What this classification means

Class II devices require demonstration of substantial equivalence to a legally marketed predicate device. This pathway does not require clinical trials - it relies on engineering equivalence and performance data. Most Immunology devices follow this clearance model.