Cleared Traditional

K830780 - KOALA C99 I.V. CONTROLLER (FDA 510(k) Clearance)

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

K830780 · Chesebrough-Pond'S U.S.A. Co. · General Hospital
Download Printable Device Report (PDF)
Optimized for regulatory review, auditing and printing
Apr 1983
Decision
28d
Days
Class 2
Risk

K830780 is an FDA 510(k) clearance for the KOALA C99 I.V. CONTROLLER. Classified as Controller, Infusion, Intravascular, Electronic (product code LDR), Class II - Special Controls.

Submitted by Chesebrough-Pond'S U.S.A. Co. (Mchenry, US). The FDA issued a Cleared decision on April 8, 1983 after a review of 28 days - a notably fast clearance cycle.

This device falls under the General Hospital FDA review panel, regulated under 21 CFR 880.5725 - the FDA general hospital 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 Chesebrough-Pond'S U.S.A. Co. devices

Submission Details

510(k) Number K830780 FDA.gov
FDA Decision Cleared Substantially Equivalent - Traditional 510(k) (SESE)
Date Received March 11, 1983
Decision Date April 08, 1983
Days to Decision 28 days
Submission Type Traditional
Review Panel General Hospital (HO)
Summary -
Third-party Review No - reviewed directly by FDA
Regulatory Context
Review time vs. panel average
100d faster than avg
Panel avg: 128d · This submission: 28d
Pathway characteristics
Predicate-based equivalence. No clinical trials required.

Device Classification

Product Code LDR Controller, Infusion, Intravascular, Electronic
Device Class Class 2 - Special Controls
CFR Regulation 21 CFR 880.5725
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 General Hospital devices follow this clearance model.