Recorded device evidence

Magstim Horizon 3.0 TMS Therapy System, Horizon 3.0 System, Horizon 3.0, H3.0, Horizon 3.0 with StimGuide+ (K223154): indications, design and recorded evidence

The acquired K223154 file contains product-specific indications and users, design and operating principle, recorded comparison and differences, non-clinical evidence actually described, clinical evidence or its stated absence 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 35 selected decisions under primary code OBP. 35 have valid reported receipt/decision pairs; 0 pairs are missing or invalid.

Calendar elapsed days: lower quartile 90.0, median 132.0, upper quartile 190.5. These are recorded calendar differences, not active FDA review time.

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
K223154 ↗ · this pageMagstim Horizon 3.0 TMS Therapy System, Horizon 3.0 System, Horizon 3.0, H3.0, Horizon 3.0 with StimGuide+2022-10-06 → 2023-03-16161Traditional
K260396 ↗KCS rTMS Therapy System (Transcranial Magnetic Stimulator) (MetaStim 100, MetaStim 100A)2026-02-06 → 2026-09-06212Traditional
K260691 ↗BTL-6992026-03-03 → 2026-08-23173Traditional
K261228 ↗QuickVision Ultimate rTMS2026-04-15 → 2026-08-14121Traditional
K260560 ↗Apollo TMS Therapy System;Apollo light TMS Therapy System2026-02-19 → 2026-05-2292Traditional

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; 1 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

K223154 · PDF page 3 ↗ Source 2

Read this statement in the original PDF; no complete statement fits the short excerpt.

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

K223154 · PDF page 4 ↗ Source 3

Read this statement in the original PDF; no complete statement fits the short excerpt.

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

Recorded comparison and differences

K223154 · PDF page 5 ↗ Source 4

Horizon® 3.0 TMS Therapy System and its technological characteristics remain almost
         identical to that cleared within K211389.

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 summary’s comparison is a manufacturer statement about that submission. Investigate the actual design differences and cited records before considering any comparator or predicate.

Non-clinical evidence actually described

K223154 · PDF page 5 ↗ Source 4

Read this statement in the original PDF; no complete statement fits the short excerpt.

Compare with your product: Treat these as documented evidence themes in this case, including any limitations or negative statements. Ask which protocols, design inputs and acceptance rationale would be justified for your product; these excerpts are not a mandatory test panel.

Clinical evidence or its stated absence

K223154 · PDF page 6 ↗ Source 5

No new clinical data is being leveraged for this 510(k) submission an                  d equivalence is being
         established through a comparison of technological characteristics.

Compare with your product: Preserve whether the summary describes clinical evidence or says none was performed. This recorded case does not determine whether your product needs clinical evidence.

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) identifierK223154 [1]Dated official record fact; not proof of current commercial availability or applicability to another device.
Generic device categoryMagstim Horizon 3.0 TMS Therapy System, Horizon 3.0 System, Horizon 3.0, H3.0, Horizon 3.0 with StimGuide+ [1]Dated official record fact; not proof of current commercial availability or applicability to another device.
Recorded applicantMagstim Company, Ltd. [1]Dated official record fact; not proof of current commercial availability or applicability to another device.
FDA product codeOBP [1]Dated official record fact; not proof of current commercial availability or applicability to another device.
Decision date2023-03-16 [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 date2022-10-06 [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. Recorded comparison and differences — what differs in our product?

    The summary’s comparison is a manufacturer statement about that submission. Investigate the actual design differences and cited records before considering any comparator or predicate.

    Useful evidence: Feature-by-feature differences and the underlying cited documents; no automated predicate selection.

  4. Non-clinical evidence actually described — what differs in our product?

    Treat these as documented evidence themes in this case, including any limitations or negative statements. Ask which protocols, design inputs and acceptance rationale would be justified for your product; these excerpts are not a mandatory test panel.

    Useful evidence: Existing protocols/results and design-specific evidence gaps, with standard editions and scope reviewed separately.

  5. Clinical evidence or its stated absence — what differs in our product?

    Preserve whether the summary describes clinical evidence or says none was performed. This recorded case does not determine whether your product needs clinical evidence.

    Useful evidence: Your proposed claims and supporting evidence, plus a reviewed rationale for clinical-evidence needs.

Work packages and dependencies

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[92863] · record ae785697645d858861fb6d3cc3bfc9ff9ba2441f18c8f1622fe74c31b15df62b
  • [6] Complete results array / fda-decision-context:K223154 · record whole dataset partition

FDA 510(k) summary — K223154 ↗

Fri, 17 Mar 2023 21:07:32 GMT · retrieved 2026-10-07

Audit details: precise locators and snapshot identifiers

Source key D02 · snapshot ad867209c20347881fbcf680f03554249a0d4e7275ae6a744ee365030079c79b

  • [2] PDF page 3 · record a62d875f720c1aa8262ae08a4b0aa5e6460d57b7e35e13252b2ffa24128e621b
  • [3] PDF page 4 · record 01c1082421e97b4b995f98a817a45bb6873bc9aa9d7aa0231b20ac92015a1402
  • [4] PDF page 5 · record 16073d1fe36019e6d7664df4962030e6ab4dbafc2b7e660c162fdf6c653522c2
  • [5] PDF page 6 · record d41a367278f90e8552e2056d53d7f48b62d40cf19564d04a638c3bab94f8a54e

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