Cleared Traditional

SIMPLEX AIRBRATOR (SAB-7) (K980672) - FDA 510(k) Clearance

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

K980672 · Irt Management Corp. · Dental device
Download Printable Device Report (PDF)
Optimized for regulatory review, auditing and printing
May 2000
Decision
804d
Days
Class 2
Risk

K980672 is an FDA 510(k) clearance for the SIMPLEX AIRBRATOR (SAB-7). Classified as Airbrush (product code KOJ), Class II - Special Controls.

Submitted by Irt Management Corp. (Hallandale, US). The FDA issued a Cleared decision on May 4, 2000 after a review of 804 days - an unusually long review period, suggesting complex equivalence evaluation.

This device falls under the Dental FDA review panel, regulated under 21 CFR 872.6080 - the FDA dental device regulatory 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 Dental submissions.

View all Irt Management Corp. devices

Submission Details

510(k) Number K980672 FDA.gov
FDA Decision Cleared Substantially Equivalent - Traditional 510(k) (SESE)
Date Received February 20, 1998
Decision Date May 04, 2000
Days to Decision 804 days
Submission Type Traditional
Review Panel Dental (DE)
Summary Statement
Third-party Review No - reviewed directly by FDA
Regulatory Context
Review time vs. panel average
677d slower than avg
Panel avg: 127d · This submission: 804d
Pathway characteristics
Predicate-based equivalence. No clinical trials required.

Device Classification

Product Code KOJ Airbrush
Device Class Class 2 - Special Controls
CFR Regulation 21 CFR 872.6080
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 Dental devices follow this clearance model.