Cleared Traditional

K851496 - ECG MONITOR MODEL RM102 (FDA 510(k) Clearance)

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

K851496 · Honeywell, Inc. · Cardiovascular device
Download Printable Device Report (PDF)
Optimized for regulatory review, auditing and printing
Jul 1985
Decision
100d
Days
Class 2
Risk

K851496 is an FDA 510(k) clearance for the ECG MONITOR MODEL RM102. Classified as Display, Cathode-ray Tube, Medical (product code DXJ), Class II - Special Controls.

Submitted by Honeywell, Inc. (Pleasantville, US). The FDA issued a Cleared decision on July 24, 1985 after a review of 100 days - within the typical 510(k) review window.

This device falls under the Cardiovascular FDA review panel, regulated under 21 CFR 870.2450 - the FDA cardiovascular device oversight 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 Cardiovascular review framework, consistent with the majority of Class II 510(k) submissions.

View all Honeywell, Inc. devices

Submission Details

510(k) Number K851496 FDA.gov
FDA Decision Cleared Substantially Equivalent - Traditional 510(k) (SESE)
Date Received April 15, 1985
Decision Date July 24, 1985
Days to Decision 100 days
Submission Type Traditional
Review Panel Cardiovascular (CV)
Summary -
Third-party Review No - reviewed directly by FDA
Regulatory Context
Review time vs. panel average
25d faster than avg
Panel avg: 125d · This submission: 100d
Pathway characteristics
Predicate-based equivalence. No clinical trials required.

Device Classification

Product Code DXJ Display, Cathode-ray Tube, Medical
Device Class Class 2 - Special Controls
CFR Regulation 21 CFR 870.2450
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 Cardiovascular devices follow this clearance model.