Cleared Traditional

EXCEL EMG (K941144) - FDA 510(k) Clearance

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

K941144 · Excel Tech. , Ltd. · Neurology device
Download Printable Device Report (PDF)
Optimized for regulatory review, auditing and printing
Nov 1995
Decision
607d
Days
Class 2
Risk

K941144 is an FDA 510(k) clearance for the EXCEL EMG. Classified as Electromyograph, Diagnostic (product code IKN), Class II - Special Controls.

Submitted by Excel Tech. , Ltd. (Oakville,Ontario, CA). The FDA issued a Cleared decision on November 7, 1995 after a review of 607 days - an unusually long review period, suggesting complex equivalence evaluation.

This device falls under the Neurology FDA review panel, regulated under 21 CFR 890.1375 - the FDA neurology 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: High-complexity regulatory submission. Elevated predicate reliance profile. The extended review timeline suggests the FDA required additional documentation before confirming substantial equivalence - a pattern common in complex or first-of-kind Neurology submissions.

View all Excel Tech. , Ltd. devices

Submission Details

510(k) Number K941144 FDA.gov
FDA Decision Cleared Substantially Equivalent - Traditional 510(k) (SESE)
Date Received March 10, 1994
Decision Date November 07, 1995
Days to Decision 607 days
Submission Type Traditional
Review Panel Neurology (NE)
Summary Statement
Third-party Review No - reviewed directly by FDA
Regulatory Context
Review time vs. panel average
459d slower than avg
Panel avg: 148d · This submission: 607d
Pathway characteristics
Predicate-based equivalence. No clinical trials required.

Device Classification

Product Code IKN Electromyograph, Diagnostic
Device Class Class 2 - Special Controls
CFR Regulation 21 CFR 890.1375
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 Neurology devices follow this clearance model.