Cleared Traditional

K771150 - COPPER KETTLE VAPORIZER PLUS (FDA 510(k) Clearance)

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

K771150 · Air Products & Chemicals, Inc. · Anesthesiology device
Download Printable Device Report (PDF)
Optimized for regulatory review, auditing and printing
Aug 1977
Decision
38d
Days
Class 2
Risk

K771150 is an FDA 510(k) clearance for the COPPER KETTLE VAPORIZER PLUS. Classified as Vaporizer, Anesthesia, Non-heated (product code CAD), Class II - Special Controls.

Submitted by Air Products & Chemicals, Inc. (Mchenry, US). The FDA issued a Cleared decision on August 4, 1977 after a review of 38 days - a notably fast clearance cycle.

This device falls under the Anesthesiology FDA review panel, regulated under 21 CFR 868.5880 - the FDA anesthesiology and respiratory 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 Air Products & Chemicals, Inc. devices

Submission Details

510(k) Number K771150 FDA.gov
FDA Decision Cleared Substantially Equivalent - Traditional 510(k) (SESE)
Date Received June 27, 1977
Decision Date August 04, 1977
Days to Decision 38 days
Submission Type Traditional
Review Panel Anesthesiology (AN)
Summary -
Third-party Review No - reviewed directly by FDA
Regulatory Context
Review time vs. panel average
101d faster than avg
Panel avg: 139d · This submission: 38d
Pathway characteristics
Predicate-based equivalence. No clinical trials required.

Device Classification

Product Code CAD Vaporizer, Anesthesia, Non-heated
Device Class Class 2 - Special Controls
CFR Regulation 21 CFR 868.5880
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 Anesthesiology devices follow this clearance model.