Cleared Traditional

K862589 - ULTRATHERM 808 I (FDA 510(k) Clearance)

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

K862589 · Elmed, Inc. · Physical Medicine device
Download Printable Device Report (PDF)
Optimized for regulatory review, auditing and printing
Aug 1986
Decision
25d
Days
Class 2
Risk

K862589 is an FDA 510(k) clearance for the ULTRATHERM 808 I. Classified as Diathermy, Shortwave, For Use In Applying Therapeutic Deep Heat (product code IMJ), Class II - Special Controls.

Submitted by Elmed, Inc. (Addison, US). The FDA issued a Cleared decision on August 1, 1986 after a review of 25 days - a notably fast clearance cycle.

This device falls under the Physical Medicine FDA review panel, regulated under 21 CFR 890.5290 - the FDA physical medicine 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 Elmed, Inc. devices

Submission Details

510(k) Number K862589 FDA.gov
FDA Decision Cleared Substantially Equivalent - Traditional 510(k) (SESE)
Date Received July 07, 1986
Decision Date August 01, 1986
Days to Decision 25 days
Submission Type Traditional
Review Panel Physical Medicine (PM)
Summary -
Third-party Review No - reviewed directly by FDA
Regulatory Context
Review time vs. panel average
90d faster than avg
Panel avg: 115d · This submission: 25d
Pathway characteristics
Predicate-based equivalence. No clinical trials required.

Device Classification

Product Code IMJ Diathermy, Shortwave, For Use In Applying Therapeutic Deep Heat
Device Class Class 2 - Special Controls
CFR Regulation 21 CFR 890.5290
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 Physical Medicine devices follow this clearance model.