Venous Window Needle Guide (PFH) — FDA decisions, comparisons and evidence
The acquired FDA endpoint has no selected substantially-equivalent K-number decisions under primary product code PFH during 2021–2025. Its latest selected record across the endpoint is dated 2013-09-13. Use that dated record only as historical context. Check the recorded scope and current route separately; these data do not provide a recent timing benchmark. The complete-year window has 0 decisions; the separate all-observed-date count is 1. These denominators describe different date ranges.
Evidence retrieved 2026-10-07. Source versions and topic-specific limits are listed below.
Source limits that change the comparison
Separate the accessory branches before selecting evidence
The section distinguishes implanted devices, nonimplanted devices and accessory branches. Paragraph (b)(4) lists particular Class I accessories and makes its notification exemption subject to §876.9; other accessories are addressed separately in (b)(3). Naming an accessory does not settle which branch applies. [4]
Prepare or ask: Specify the exact accessory and implanted/nonimplanted configuration. Identify the relevant paragraph and referenced limitations before applying catheter controls or an exemption.
Recorded scope and its declared regulatory reference
An exact FDA-record regulation_number match to one acquired Title 21 section. Records with the same normalized scope definition, class, regulation and recorded submission/GMP flags are grouped. Sparse definitions and generic exemption boilerplate do not qualify. No text-similarity equivalence or legal applicability is inferred.
What scope does the FDA record describe?
For use as an access device accessory on arteriovenous fistulas (AVF) for hemodialysis procedures using a constant site or buttonhole method of needle insertion.
Compare the proposed indication, user, anatomy, technology and operating principle with this actual scope; record differences and unresolved facts.
§ 876.5540 Blood access device and accessories. (a) Identification. A blood access device and accessories is a device intended to provide access to a patient's blood for hemodialysis or other chronic uses. When used in hemodialysis, it is part of an artificial kidney system for the treatment of patients with renal failure or toxemic conditions and provides access to a patient's blood for hemodialysis. The device includes implanted blood access devices, nonimplanted blood access devices, and accessories for both the implanted and nonimplanted blood access devices. (1) The implanted blood access device is a prescription device and consists of various flexible or rigid tubes, such as catheters, or cannulae, which are surgically implanted in appropriate blood vessels, may come through the skin, and are intended to remain in the body for 30 days or more. This generic type of device includes various catheters, shunts, and connectors specifically designed to provide access to blood. Examples include single and double lumen catheters with cuff(s), fully subcutaneous port-catheter systems, and A-V shunt cannulae (with vessel tips). The implanted blood access device may also contain coatings or additives which may provide additional functionality to the device. (2) The nonimplanted blood access device consists of various flexible or rigid tubes, such as catheters, cannulae or hollow needles, which are inserted into appropriate blood vessels or a vascular graft prosthesis (§§ 870.3450 and 870.3460), and are intended to remain in the body for less than 30 days. This generic type of device includes fistula needles, the single needle dialysis set (coaxial flow needle), and the single needle dialysis set (alternating flow needle). (3) Accessories common to either type include the shunt adaptor, cannula clamp, shunt connector, shunt stabilizer, vessel dilator, disconnect forceps, shunt guard, crimp plier, tube plier, crimp ring, joint ring, fistula adaptor, and declotting tray (including contents). (b) Classification. (1) Class II (special controls) for the implanted blood access device. The special controls for this device are: (i) Components of the device that come into human contact must be demonstrated to be biocompatible. Material names and specific designation numbers must be provided. (ii) Performance data must demonstrate that the device performs as intended under anticipated conditions of use. The following performance characteristics must be tested: (A) Pressure versus flow rates for both arterial and venous lumens, from the minimum flow rate to the maximum flow rate in 100 milliliter per minute increments, must be established. The fluid and its viscosity used during testing must be stated. (B) Recirculation rates for both forward and reverse flow configurations must be established, along with the protocol used to perform the assay, which must be provided. (C) Priming volumes must be established. (D) Tensile testing of joints and materials must be conducted. The minimum acceptance criteria must be adequate for its intended use. (E) Air leakage testing and liquid leakage testing must be conducted. (F) Testing of the repeated clamping of the extensions of the catheter that simulates use over the life of the device must be conducted, and retested for leakage. (G) Mechanical hemolysis testing must be conducted for new or altered device designs that affect the blood flow pattern. (H) Chemical tolerance of the device to repeated exposure to commonly used disinfection agents must be established. (iii) Performance data must demonstrate the sterility of the device. (iv) Performance data must support the shelf life of the device for continued sterility, package integrity, and functionality over the requested shelf life that must include tensile, repeated clamping, and leakage testing. (v) Labeling of implanted blood access devices for hemodialysis must include the following: (A) Labeling must provide arterial and venous pressure versus flow rates, either in tabular or graphical format. The fluid and its viscosity used during testing must be stated. (B) Labeling must specify the forward and reverse recirculation rates. (C) Labeling must provide the arterial and venous priming volumes. (D) Labeling must specify an expiration date. (E) Labeling must identify any disinfecting agents that cannot be used to clean any components of the device. (F) Any contraindicated disinfecting agents due to material incompatibility must be identified by printing a warning on the catheter. Alternatively, contraindicated disinfecting agents must be identified by a label affixed to the patient's medical record and with written instructions provided directly to the patient. (G) Labeling must include a patient implant card. (H) The labeling must contain comprehensive instructions for the following: ( 1 ) Preparation and insertion of the device, including recommended site of insertion, method of insertion, and a reference on the proper location for tip placement; ( 2 ) Proper care and maintenance of the device and device exit site; ( 3 ) Removal of the device; ( 4 ) Anticoagulation; ( 5 ) Management of obstruction and thrombus formation; and ( 6 ) Qualifications for clinical providers performing the insertion, maintenance, and removal of the devices. (vi) In addition to Special Controls in paragraphs (b)(1)(i) through (v) of this section, implanted blood access devices that include subcutaneous ports must include the following: (A) Labeling must include the recommended type of needle for access as well as detailed instructions for care and maintenance of the port, subcutaneous pocket, and skin overlying the port. (B) Performance testing must include results on repeated use of the ports that simulates use over the intended life of the device. (C) Clinical performance testing must demonstrate safe and effective use and capture any adverse events observed during clinical use. (vii) In addition to Special Controls in paragraphs (b)(1)(i) through (v) of this section, implanted blood access devices with coatings or additives must include the following: (A) A description and material characterization of the coating or additive material, the purpose of the coating or additive, duration of effectiveness, and how and where the coating is applied. (B) An identification in the labeling of any coatings or additives and a summary of the results of performance testing for any coating or material with special characteristics, such as decreased thrombus formation or antimicrobial properties. (C) A Warning Statement in the labeling for potential allergic reactions including anaphylaxis if the coating or additive contains known allergens. (D) Performance data must demonstrate efficacy of the coating or additive and the duration of effectiveness. (viii) The following must be included for A-V shunt cannulae (with vessel tips): (A) The device must comply with Special Controls in paragraphs (b)(1)(i) through (v) of this section with the exception of paragraphs (b)(1)(ii)(B), (b)(1)(ii)(C), (b)(1)(v)(B), and (b)(1)(v)(C), which do not apply. (B) Labeling must include Warning Statements to address the potential for vascular access steal syndrome, arterial stenosis, arterial thrombosis, and hemorrhage including exsanguination given that the device accesses the arterial circulation. (C) Clinical performance testing must demonstrate safe and effective use and capture any adverse events observed during clinical use. (2) Class II (performance standards) for the nonimplanted blood access device. (3) Class II (performance standards) for accessories for both the implanted and the nonimplanted blood access devices not listed in paragraph (b)(4) of this section. (4) Class I for the cannula clamp, disconnect forceps, crimp plier, tube plier, crimp ring, and joint ring, accessories for both the implanted and nonimplanted blood access device. The devices subject to this paragraph (b)(4) are exempt from the premarket notification procedures in subpart E of part 807 of this chapter subject to the limitations in § 876.9. [48 FR 53023, Nov. 23, 1983, as amended at 52 FR 17738, May 11, 1987; 61 FR 1122, Jan. 16, 1996; 66 FR 38802, July 25, 2001; 79 FR 43245, July 25, 2014]
Read the identification, classification, conditions and referenced limitations in the cited section. A numeric reference match is not a buyer classification or exemption determination.
Deduplicate by official submission ID across the complete current manifest partitions. Select exact primary product code, K-number format and the stated SE decision codes with valid dates. Recent distributions use the five complete calendar years preceding the latest valid endpoint decision year. Partial-year counts compare equal January-to-cutoff periods. Quartiles use linear interpolation at (n-1)*p and are withheld below 20 valid date pairs. The analysis n describes only its declared complete-year window; selected_se_n separately counts all selected recorded dates through the cutoff.
1 selected records across all observed dates; 0 other/invalid identifier or decision-date records excluded. 0 missing or invalid date pairs in the five-year window.
Date fields: date_received → decision_date. Quantiles: Hyndman–Fan type 7: linear interpolation at (n − 1) × p; displayed to one decimal; n ≥ 20 valid pairs.
Receipt-to-decision calendar elapsed time includes time outside active FDA review; it is not FDA review time, a promised project timeline or an estimate of future clearance. This selected recorded cohort does not include all applications or establish a success probability, predicate suitability, market size, current market availability or legal authorization for another product.
Calculation fda-buyer-research-3 · database cutoff 2026-09-27. CSV rows identify each official K-number, cohort, date pair, exclusion reason and source version.
Separate partial-year update
2026 decisions through 2026-09-27
0 selected decisions from 2026-01-01 to 2026-09-27. The equivalent previous-year period contains 0 decisions through 2025-09-27. These counts describe the records; they are not market growth or submission success rates.
Named records to investigate
Latest decisions across the database
These dated records may come from 2026 or earlier years. They are a separate investigation list, not the five-year statistical cohort. Compare the actual indications and technology before considering a record as a comparator.
Official record / device
Recorded applicant
Decision
Recorded type
Calendar days
K130873 ↗VWING VASCULAR NEEDLE GUIDE, 4MM X 07MM; VWING VASCULAR NEEDLE GUIDE, 6MM X 07MM; VWING VASCULAR NEEDLE GUIDE, 8MM X 07M
Vital Access
2013-09-13
Traditional
168
Supporting documents actually acquired
Go beyond the database row
Read the source context, then compare the evidence with your design. Topic locations below are text matches, including possible limitations or negative statements; they are not a mandatory test list.
For use as an access device accessory on arteriovenous fistulas (AVF) for hemodialysis procedures using a constant site or buttonhole method of needle insertion. [1]
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.
Which specific part of the recorded scope fits or differs?
Put your proposed label and design beside the quoted definition. Record matching facts, differences and missing facts separately; naming the category alone cannot resolve scope.
Useful evidence: Proposed indication/design and a definition-to-product comparison with source locators.
Have the cited section and its limitations been reviewed?
Record the applicable paragraph, conditions and cross-referenced limitations after specialist review. Keep a claimed exemption separate from actual establishment, listing and quality-system responsibilities.
Useful evidence: Dated classification/route rationale and the current provisions relied on, with unresolved conditions.
Separate historical research from a recent comparator
No selected decision falls in the complete-year window. Any named records shown are separately dated historical or current-year research. Obtain their actual indications and assess the current route before using a comparator; the absence of a recent record does not establish an exemption or a route.
Useful evidence: Proposed indication/design, the dated named record if available, and a current route/comparator research rationale.
Explain the technology and evidence differences
For each comparison, record the different materials, hardware, software functions and operating conditions. Link each difference to existing evidence or an unresolved evaluation task.
Useful evidence: A three-column matrix: comparator fact / your design fact / evidence or unresolved gap.
Prepare a scope-based schedule without a sparse timing benchmark
This recent cohort has fewer than 20 valid date pairs, so it supplies no median or percentile benchmark. Ask for a schedule based on actual preparation, evidence gaps, interactions and response assumptions; keep any historical decision context separately dated.
Useful evidence: Document/test readiness, unresolved route/evidence tasks and the assumptions behind the specialist’s proposed sequence.
Work packages and dependencies
Conditional: FDA 510(k) Submission Services — Review the supplied facts and evidence gaps before confirming the service scope.
Optional: Find FDA US Agent Services | Compare & Get Quotes — Include only if your product, actor and delivery needs justify this additional scope. Confirm the responsibility and evidence handoff with the coordinating specialist.
Optional: FDA QMSR Transition & Inspection Readiness (ISO 13485 Alignment) — Include only if your product, actor and delivery needs justify this additional scope. Confirm the responsibility and evidence handoff with the coordinating specialist.
What needs to happen first
FDA 510(k) Submission Services → Find FDA US Agent Services | Compare & Get Quotes: Confirm the main product/actor scope and evidence gaps before deciding whether to commission this additional service.
FDA 510(k) Submission Services → FDA QMSR Transition & Inspection Readiness (ISO 13485 Alignment): Confirm the main product/actor scope and evidence gaps before deciding whether to commission this additional service.
Questions for providers
Which of the named PFH decisions are actually comparable to our proposed indications and technology, and which would you exclude?
Which evidence differences prevent us from using the comparison yet, and what deliverable resolves each one?
Does your schedule separate submission preparation, testing, FDA interactions and customer response time? What assumptions change it?
Sources and data dates
Read the official document in context. The audit details identify the precise locators and preserved versions used for this page.
