Cleared Traditional

P200TE (K173707) - FDA 510(k) Clearance

Class II Ophthalmic device cleared through predicate-based substantial equivalence.

K173707 · Optos Plc. · Ophthalmic device
Download Printable Device Report (PDF)
Optimized for regulatory review, auditing and printing
Feb 2018
Decision
86d
Days
Class 2
Risk

K173707 is an FDA 510(k) clearance for the P200TE. Classified as Tomography, Optical Coherence (product code OBO), Class II - Special Controls.

Submitted by Optos Plc. (Dunfermline, GB). The FDA issued a Cleared decision on February 28, 2018 after a review of 86 days - a notably fast clearance cycle.

This device falls under the Ophthalmic FDA review panel, regulated under 21 CFR 886.1570 - the FDA ophthalmic 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 Optos Plc. devices

Submission Details

510(k) Number K173707 FDA.gov
FDA Decision Cleared Substantially Equivalent - Traditional 510(k) (SESE)
Date Received December 04, 2017
Decision Date February 28, 2018
Days to Decision 86 days
Submission Type Traditional
Review Panel Ophthalmic (OP)
Summary Summary PDF
Third-party Review No - reviewed directly by FDA
Combination Product No
PCCP Authorized No
Regulatory Context
Review time vs. panel average
24d faster than avg
Panel avg: 110d · This submission: 86d
Pathway characteristics
Predicate-based equivalence.

Device Classification

Product Code OBO Tomography, Optical Coherence
Device Class Class 2 - Special Controls
CFR Regulation 21 CFR 886.1570
Definition Viewing, Imaging, Measurement, And Analysis Of Ocular Structures. Diagnostic Device To Aid In The Detection And Management Of Various Ocular Diseases.
What this classification means

Class II devices require demonstration of substantial equivalence to a legally marketed predicate device. Clinical trial data may be submitted as supporting evidence to strengthen the substantial equivalence argument. Most Ophthalmic devices follow this clearance model.