Cleared Traditional

K955444 - ABBOTT AXSM PROCAINAMIDE ASSAY (FDA 510(k) Clearance)

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

K955444 · Abbott Laboratories · Toxicology device
Download Printable Device Report (PDF)
Optimized for regulatory review, auditing and printing
Apr 1996
Decision
126d
Days
Class 2
Risk

K955444 is an FDA 510(k) clearance for the ABBOTT AXSM PROCAINAMIDE ASSAY. Classified as Enzyme Immunoassay, Procainamide (product code LAR), Class II - Special Controls.

Submitted by Abbott Laboratories (Abbott Park, US). The FDA issued a Cleared decision on April 2, 1996 after a review of 126 days - within the typical 510(k) review window.

This device falls under the Toxicology FDA review panel, regulated under 21 CFR 862.3320 - the FDA toxicology 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 Toxicology review framework, consistent with the majority of Class II 510(k) submissions.

View all Abbott Laboratories devices

Submission Details

510(k) Number K955444 FDA.gov
FDA Decision Cleared Substantially Equivalent - Traditional 510(k) (SESE)
Date Received November 28, 1995
Decision Date April 02, 1996
Days to Decision 126 days
Submission Type Traditional
Review Panel Toxicology (TX)
Summary Summary PDF
Third-party Review No - reviewed directly by FDA
Regulatory Context
Review time vs. panel average
39d slower than avg
Panel avg: 87d · This submission: 126d
Pathway characteristics
Predicate-based equivalence. No clinical trials required.

Device Classification

Product Code LAR Enzyme Immunoassay, Procainamide
Device Class Class 2 - Special Controls
CFR Regulation 21 CFR 862.3320
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 Toxicology devices follow this clearance model.