Cleared Traditional

K953748 - TECHNOFIL (FDA 510(k) Clearance)

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

K953748 · Technimeca Medic, Inc. · Anesthesiology device
Download Printable Device Report (PDF)
Optimized for regulatory review, auditing and printing
Jan 1996
Decision
167d
Days
Class 2
Risk

K953748 is an FDA 510(k) clearance for the TECHNOFIL. Classified as Vaporizer, Anesthesia, Non-heated (product code CAD), Class II - Special Controls.

Submitted by Technimeca Medic, Inc. (St. Laurent, Quebec, CA). The FDA issued a Cleared decision on January 25, 1996 after a review of 167 days - an extended review cycle.

This device falls under the Anesthesiology FDA review panel, regulated under 21 CFR 868.5880 - the FDA anesthesiology and respiratory 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 Anesthesiology review framework, consistent with the majority of Class II 510(k) submissions.

View all Technimeca Medic, Inc. devices

Submission Details

510(k) Number K953748 FDA.gov
FDA Decision Cleared Substantially Equivalent - Traditional 510(k) (SESE)
Date Received August 11, 1995
Decision Date January 25, 1996
Days to Decision 167 days
Submission Type Traditional
Review Panel Anesthesiology (AN)
Summary Summary PDF
Third-party Review No - reviewed directly by FDA
Regulatory Context
Review time vs. panel average
28d slower than avg
Panel avg: 139d · This submission: 167d
Pathway characteristics
Predicate-based equivalence. No clinical trials required.

Device Classification

Product Code CAD Vaporizer, Anesthesia, Non-heated
Device Class Class 2 - Special Controls
CFR Regulation 21 CFR 868.5880
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 Anesthesiology devices follow this clearance model.