Cleared Traditional

K854944 - TDX IMMUNOGLOBULIN M DIAGNOSTIC KIT (FDA 510(k) Clearance)

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

K854944 · Abbott Laboratories · Immunology device
Download Printable Device Report (PDF)
Optimized for regulatory review, auditing and printing
Aug 1986
Decision
260d
Days
Class 2
Risk

K854944 is an FDA 510(k) clearance for the TDX IMMUNOGLOBULIN M DIAGNOSTIC KIT. Classified as Gamma Globulin, Antigen, Antiserum, Control (product code DAH), Class II - Special Controls.

Submitted by Abbott Laboratories (Irving, US). The FDA issued a Cleared decision on August 27, 1986 after a review of 260 days - an extended review cycle.

This device falls under the Immunology FDA review panel, regulated under 21 CFR 866.5510 - the FDA immunology 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 Immunology review framework, consistent with the majority of Class II 510(k) submissions.

View all Abbott Laboratories devices

Submission Details

510(k) Number K854944 FDA.gov
FDA Decision Cleared Substantially Equivalent - Traditional 510(k) (SESE)
Date Received December 10, 1985
Decision Date August 27, 1986
Days to Decision 260 days
Submission Type Traditional
Review Panel Immunology (IM)
Summary -
Third-party Review No - reviewed directly by FDA
Regulatory Context
Review time vs. panel average
156d slower than avg
Panel avg: 104d · This submission: 260d
Pathway characteristics
Predicate-based equivalence. No clinical trials required.

Device Classification

Product Code DAH Gamma Globulin, Antigen, Antiserum, Control
Device Class Class 2 - Special Controls
CFR Regulation 21 CFR 866.5510
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 Immunology devices follow this clearance model.