Recorded device evidence

Automatic Tissue Processing Unit (K172717): indications, design and recorded evidence

The acquired K172717 file contains product-specific indications and users, design and operating principle, performance evidence actually described sections. Compare these dated manufacturer statements with your own indication and design before commissioning evidence work. They describe this submission; they do not prescribe your testing, validate performance independently or establish a suitable predicate.

Evidence retrieved 2026-10-07. Source versions and topic-specific limits are listed below.

Computed exact-code research

This decision beside its recorded product-code cohort

The 2021–2025 complete-year cohort contains 3 selected decisions under primary code MUU. 3 have valid reported receipt/decision pairs; 0 pairs are missing or invalid.

No quartiles are displayed: this complete-year cohort has fewer than 20 valid pairs.

The table shows the named decision and up to four latest exact-code research records through 2026-09-27. It can include partial-year records outside the complete-year cohort. The quartiles above use the full stated cohort, not this displayed selection.

Research recordRecorded deviceReceipt → decisionCalendar elapsed daysRecorded submission type
K172717 ↗ · this pageAutomatic Tissue Processing Unit2017-09-08 → 2018-05-25259Traditional
K210528 ↗IntelliFat Disposable Adipose Tissue Harvesting and Transfer Kit, IntelliFat Body On Demand (BOD) Kit2021-02-23 → 2022-03-16386Traditional
K203800 ↗SyntrFuge System2020-12-28 → 2021-07-02186Traditional
K202443 ↗Smart Kit Basic, Smart Kit Pro2020-08-26 → 2021-03-11197Traditional
K193539 ↗REVOLVE ENVI 600 Advanced Adipose System2019-12-20 → 2020-05-28160Traditional

Use this comparison: select a record to investigate, read its actual indications and design, and document differences. A shared code or elapsed period cannot establish its relevance to your device.

Calendar elapsed days are not active FDA review time, a promised schedule or a success probability. The selection includes only the stated recorded decisions, not all applications. Latest records can postdate the named historical decision and are contextual research, not its predicates. Shared codes, summaries and observed records do not prove equivalence, current market availability, buyer applicability or predicate suitability.

Calculation, selection and source versions

Reuse the complete-endpoint exact-primary-code, documented SE-decision cohort and its stated cutoff/window. Retain its type-7 quartiles only when at least 20 valid date pairs are present. Independently subtract the named official record’s receipt date from its decision date; missing or negative pairs remain unknown. Show up to four latest exact-code research records, excluding the named ID. Parent analysis hash, source snapshots and calculation versions are retained.

Calculation: fda-named-decision-cohort-context-1; cutoff 2026-09-27; 0 parent records excluded; units record counts; calendar elapsed days.

Source snapshots: 5a86994ba49a37e71e09be96803fd51981c6c43eaa96caab41aea2b188bfe002.

Read beyond the decision row

Recorded evidence and differences to investigate

The summary is manufacturer-submitted context hosted by FDA. Negative/no-study statements are preserved. Evidence themes are not binding legal requirements.

Short opening excerpts identify the source sections. Read the linked original for the full study context, negative statements, tables and limitations. Public quotations are limited to 120 words per acquired summary; the internal evidence packet retains exact section ranges for review.

Indications and users

K172717 · PDF page 3 ↗ Source 2

The Automatic Tissue Processing Unit is used in medical procedures involving the harvesting and transferring of
autologous adipose tissue. The Automatic Tissue Processing Unit is used for concentrating adipose tissue harvested with a
legally marketed lipoplasty system.

The excerpt is shortened at a complete statement. Read the complete section in the original PDF before interpreting the evidence.

Compare with your product: Compare the recorded indication, population, body site and use environment with your proposed label. Record each change instead of assuming the primary code settles intended use.

Design and operating principle

K172717 · PDF page 4 ↗ Source 3

The        f at          harv est ed                              by        liposuction,        c all ed                            as           lipoaspi                    r ates,       c ont ai                     ns      f at        tissues,         bloody         im purit ies          and
   tum esc ent       sol ut i on.

The excerpt is shortened at a complete statement. Read the complete section in the original PDF before interpreting the evidence.

Compare with your product: Compare physical design, materials, energy, accessories and operating principle with your design. Ask which documented differences change the evidence scope.

Performance evidence actually described

K172717 · PDF page 5 ↗ Source 4

1)                         Bench      test         w ere                              performed.         Bench     testing                                              included                                                                                         biocompatibility,       mechanical      t esti ng,                                       st erilit y
                       testing   including                                        EO      residues.   The                                           tests      demonstrated                                              that     the                                             device     performs      in   a    substantially
                       equivalent          manner        t o       the          predicate       device.

The excerpt is shortened at a complete statement. Read the complete section in the original PDF before interpreting the evidence.

Compare with your product: The source labels this section as performance data. Determine which described evidence is bench, software, biological or clinical from the actual narrative and original tables; the section label alone does not settle that distinction or prescribe your testing.

Extraction selection and limits

Select observed whole-line section headings or explicit colon-delimited inline labels on readable PDF pages, including the explicitly documented heading-spacing variants in this parser version. Preserve the original heading, character ranges and layout; do not repair excerpt text. Exclude letter boilerplate and uncertain pages. Stop at observed table headings; do not infer table columns or scalar results from layout text. Multi-column or suspicious split-numeric excerpts are excluded until reviewed alternate extraction is available. Original layout records remain retained; any alternate text has its own extractor-version locator and requires original-page review. For each dimension, prefer usable versioned alternate text where available, selecting its longest usable excerpt; otherwise select the longest usable original-layout excerpt. Ties preserve source order. Bounded to 64 PDF pages and 3,500 characters per section. This is a selection, not a complete dossier analysis.

Excluded extraction items: {}.

Known facts and deciding inputs

Known context: US. Confirm the organisation’s role, relevant activities and markets against the cited criteria.

Source factRecorded valueWhat to check
510(k) identifierK172717 [1]Dated official record fact; not proof of current commercial availability or applicability to another device.
Generic device categoryAutomatic Tissue Processing Unit [1]Dated official record fact; not proof of current commercial availability or applicability to another device.
Recorded applicantBsl Co. [1]Dated official record fact; not proof of current commercial availability or applicability to another device.
FDA product codeMUU [1]Dated official record fact; not proof of current commercial availability or applicability to another device.
Decision date2018-05-25 [1]Dated official record fact; not proof of current commercial availability or applicability to another device.
Recorded decision codeSESE [1]Dated official record fact; not proof of current commercial availability or applicability to another device.
Submission typeTraditional [1]Dated official record fact; not proof of current commercial availability or applicability to another device.
Receipt date2017-09-08 [1]Dated official record fact; not proof of current commercial availability or applicability to another device.

Prepare a differences and evidence worksheet

Use this checklist to gather your business or product details before speaking with a specialist. The items below explain what to record and suggest useful supporting documents. You can add your own answers in the editable project brief.

  1. Indications and users — what differs in our product?

    Compare the recorded indication, population, body site and use environment with your proposed label. Record each change instead of assuming the primary code settles intended use.

    Useful evidence: Our proposed indication, user/population and use environment beside this exact recorded indication.

  2. Design and operating principle — what differs in our product?

    Compare physical design, materials, energy, accessories and operating principle with your design. Ask which documented differences change the evidence scope.

    Useful evidence: Design description, materials/components, accessory list and a differences matrix.

  3. Performance evidence actually described — what differs in our product?

    The source labels this section as performance data. Determine which described evidence is bench, software, biological or clinical from the actual narrative and original tables; the section label alone does not settle that distinction or prescribe your testing.

    Useful evidence: The cited narrative and full tables, underlying protocols/results and a reviewed comparison with the proposed product.

Work packages and dependencies

What needs to happen first

Questions for providers

Sources and data dates

Read the official document in context. The audit details identify the precise locators and preserved versions used for this page.

FDA openFDA — 510(k) decision records ↗

2026-10-05 · retrieved 2026-10-06

Audit details: precise locators and snapshot identifiers

Source key D01 · snapshot 5a86994ba49a37e71e09be96803fd51981c6c43eaa96caab41aea2b188bfe002

  • [1] device-510k-0001-of-0001.json:results[61675] · record 59389c59670891329007c741aa3ee6e7be545db25df10ead4bdd08142cf36778
  • [5] Complete results array / fda-decision-context:K172717 · record whole dataset partition

FDA 510(k) summary — K172717 ↗

Tue, 31 Jul 2018 14:48:26 GMT · retrieved 2026-10-07

Audit details: precise locators and snapshot identifiers

Source key D02 · snapshot 78cf0234d7a31807a3fcff5f140f12dfd708c8b37f394d8cade12f5ad40b7633

  • [2] PDF page 3 · record a707dd63a1de907c1bec9ae57260c9ee4ab805f42f74fe203c21d5e8a11f1c74
  • [3] PDF page 4 · record 8d1fca454f422b9ecb72272d8d447db72b22cdbe8fee7315184d38adf9092618
  • [4] PDF page 5 · record 6903d2702959a2d28102724c5f1cc613275bcf7ffa9125d4054fe72ff45b9afd

Prepare an editable project brief

Confirm the facts, scope and contact preference before sharing your project. Preparing this page sends no provider outreach.

Choose work packages to discuss

Compare FDA 510(k) Submission Services

Biocompatibility Testing (ISO 10993 Program)