Cleared Traditional

GRIESHABER RETINAL TACK AND SUTHERLAND TACK FORCEP (K897119) - FDA 510(k) Clearance

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

K897119 · Grieshaber & Co. · Ophthalmic device
Download Printable Device Report (PDF)
Optimized for regulatory review, auditing and printing
Apr 1990
Decision
107d
Days
Class 2
Risk

K897119 is an FDA 510(k) clearance for the GRIESHABER RETINAL TACK AND SUTHERLAND TACK FORCEP. Classified as Clip, Tantalum, Ophthalmic (product code HQW), Class II - Special Controls.

Submitted by Grieshaber & Co. (Langhorne, US). The FDA issued a Cleared decision on April 12, 1990 after a review of 107 days - within the typical 510(k) review window.

This device falls under the Ophthalmic FDA review panel, regulated under 21 CFR 886.3100 - the FDA ophthalmic 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 Ophthalmic review framework, consistent with the majority of Class II 510(k) submissions.

View all Grieshaber & Co. devices

Submission Details

510(k) Number K897119 FDA.gov
FDA Decision Cleared Substantially Equivalent - Traditional 510(k) (SESE)
Date Received December 26, 1989
Decision Date April 12, 1990
Days to Decision 107 days
Submission Type Traditional
Review Panel Ophthalmic (OP)
Summary -
Third-party Review No - reviewed directly by FDA
Regulatory Context
Review time vs. panel average
3d faster than avg
Panel avg: 110d · This submission: 107d
Pathway characteristics
Predicate-based equivalence. No clinical trials required.

Device Classification

Product Code HQW Clip, Tantalum, Ophthalmic
Device Class Class 2 - Special Controls
CFR Regulation 21 CFR 886.3100
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 Ophthalmic devices follow this clearance model.