Cleared Traditional

K895668 - DIGICAM LHP (VIDEO INTERFACE OPTION) (FDA 510(k) Clearance)

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

K895668 · Siemens Gammasonics, Inc. · Radiology device
Download Printable Device Report (PDF)
Optimized for regulatory review, auditing and printing
Nov 1989
Decision
56d
Days
Class 2
Risk

K895668 is an FDA 510(k) clearance for the DIGICAM LHP (VIDEO INTERFACE OPTION). Classified as Camera, Multi Format, Radiological (product code LMC), Class II - Special Controls.

Submitted by Siemens Gammasonics, Inc. (Hoffman Estates, US). The FDA issued a Cleared decision on November 15, 1989 after a review of 56 days - a notably fast clearance cycle.

This device falls under the Radiology FDA review panel, regulated under 21 CFR 892.2040 - the FDA radiology and imaging software 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: 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 Siemens Gammasonics, Inc. devices

Submission Details

510(k) Number K895668 FDA.gov
FDA Decision Cleared Substantially Equivalent - Traditional 510(k) (SESE)
Date Received September 20, 1989
Decision Date November 15, 1989
Days to Decision 56 days
Submission Type Traditional
Review Panel Radiology (RA)
Summary -
Third-party Review No - reviewed directly by FDA
Regulatory Context
Review time vs. panel average
51d faster than avg
Panel avg: 107d · This submission: 56d
Pathway characteristics
Predicate-based equivalence. No clinical trials required.

Device Classification

Product Code LMC Camera, Multi Format, Radiological
Device Class Class 2 - Special Controls
CFR Regulation 21 CFR 892.2040
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 Radiology devices follow this clearance model.