Cleared Traditional

K243504 - MAIA (AHMACME001) (FDA 510(k) Clearance)

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

K243504 · Centervue S.P.A. · Ophthalmic device
Download Printable Device Report (PDF)
Optimized for regulatory review, auditing and printing
Mar 2025
Decision
125d
Days
Class 2
Risk

K243504 is an FDA 510(k) clearance for the MAIA (AHMACME001). Classified as Ophthalmoscope, Laser, Scanning (product code MYC), Class II - Special Controls.

Submitted by Centervue S.P.A. (Padova, IT). The FDA issued a Cleared decision on March 17, 2025 after a review of 125 days - within the typical 510(k) review window.

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: Standard predicate-based submission. Standard predicate reliance. This clearance follows a standard predicate-based equivalence path within the Ophthalmic review framework, consistent with the majority of Class II 510(k) submissions.

View all Centervue S.P.A. devices

Submission Details

510(k) Number K243504 FDA.gov
FDA Decision Cleared Substantially Equivalent - Traditional 510(k) (SESE)
Date Received November 12, 2024
Decision Date March 17, 2025
Days to Decision 125 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
15d slower than avg
Panel avg: 110d · This submission: 125d
Pathway characteristics
Predicate-based equivalence. No clinical trials required.

Device Classification

Product Code MYC Ophthalmoscope, Laser, Scanning
Device Class Class 2 - Special Controls
CFR Regulation 21 CFR 886.1570
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 Ophthalmic devices follow this clearance model.