Cleared Traditional

K911888 - PHILIPS ANGIOPRO (FDA 510(k) Clearance)

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

Download Printable Device Report (PDF)
Optimized for regulatory review, auditing and printing
Oct 1991
Decision
169d
Days
Class 2
Risk

K911888 is an FDA 510(k) clearance for the PHILIPS ANGIOPRO. Classified as Programmer, Changer, Film/cassette, Radiographic (product code IZP), Class II - Special Controls.

Submitted by Philips Medical Systems North America, Inc. (Shelton, US). The FDA issued a Cleared decision on October 15, 1991 after a review of 169 days - an extended review cycle.

This device falls under the Radiology FDA review panel, regulated under 21 CFR 892.1870 - 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: Standard predicate-based submission. Standard predicate reliance. This clearance follows a standard predicate-based equivalence path within the Radiology review framework, consistent with the majority of Class II 510(k) submissions.

View all Philips Medical Systems North America, Inc. devices

Submission Details

510(k) Number K911888 FDA.gov
FDA Decision Cleared Substantially Equivalent - Traditional 510(k) (SESE)
Date Received April 29, 1991
Decision Date October 15, 1991
Days to Decision 169 days
Submission Type Traditional
Review Panel Radiology (RA)
Summary Summary PDF
Third-party Review No - reviewed directly by FDA
Regulatory Context
Review time vs. panel average
62d slower than avg
Panel avg: 107d · This submission: 169d
Pathway characteristics
Predicate-based equivalence. No clinical trials required.

Device Classification

Product Code IZP Programmer, Changer, Film/cassette, Radiographic
Device Class Class 2 - Special Controls
CFR Regulation 21 CFR 892.1870
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.