Cleared Traditional

PEDIWET=GUAZE IMPREGNATED WITH PETROL (K802007) - FDA 510(k) Clearance

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

K802007 · Pollak (Intl.), Ltd. · Gastroenterology & Urology device
Download Printable Device Report (PDF)
Optimized for regulatory review, auditing and printing
Sep 1980
Decision
37d
Days
Class 2
Risk

K802007 is an FDA 510(k) clearance for the PEDIWET=GUAZE IMPREGNATED WITH PETROL. Classified as Tube, Levine (product code FRQ), Class II - Special Controls.

Submitted by Pollak (Intl.), Ltd. (Walker, US). The FDA issued a Cleared decision on September 26, 1980 after a review of 37 days - a notably fast clearance cycle.

This device falls under the Gastroenterology & Urology FDA review panel, regulated under 21 CFR 876.5980 - the FDA gastroenterology and urology 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 Pollak (Intl.), Ltd. devices

Submission Details

510(k) Number K802007 FDA.gov
FDA Decision Cleared Substantially Equivalent - Traditional 510(k) (SESE)
Date Received August 20, 1980
Decision Date September 26, 1980
Days to Decision 37 days
Submission Type Traditional
Review Panel Gastroenterology & Urology (GU)
Summary -
Third-party Review No - reviewed directly by FDA
Regulatory Context
Review time vs. panel average
93d faster than avg
Panel avg: 130d · This submission: 37d
Pathway characteristics
Predicate-based equivalence. No clinical trials required.

Device Classification

Product Code FRQ Tube, Levine
Device Class Class 2 - Special Controls
CFR Regulation 21 CFR 876.5980
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 Gastroenterology & Urology devices follow this clearance model.