Document headings vary by document type but may contain
                    the following: the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document
the number of the CFR title and the number of each part
                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly
                      related to
the agency docket number / agency internal file number
the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in
                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory
                      Actions See the
                    Document Drafting Handbook
                    for more details.
 Department of Health and Human Services Food and Drug Administration 21 CFR Part 882
[Docket No. FDA-2017-N-5934]
 AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.
 ACTION: Final order.
 SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or we) is classifying the non-electroencephalogram (non-EEG) physiological signal based seizure monitoring system into class II (special controls). The special controls that apply to the device type are identified in this order and will be part of the codified language for the non-EEG physiological signal based seizure monitoring system's classification. We 
                        ( print page 50081)
                        are taking this action because we have determined that classifying the device into class II (special controls) will provide a reasonable assurance of safety and effectiveness of the device. We believe this action will also enhance patients' access to beneficial innovative devices, in part by reducing regulatory burdens.
 DATES: This order is effective October 30, 2017. The classification was applicable on February 16, 2017.
 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Xiaorui Tang, Center for Devices and Radiological Health, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 66, Rm. 2609, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, 301-796-6500, 
                        *xiaorui.tang@fda.hhs.gov.*


SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:  I. Background Upon request, FDA has classified the non-EEG physiological signal based seizure monitoring system as class II (special controls), which we have determined will provide a reasonable assurance of safety and effectiveness. In addition, we believe this action will enhance patients' access to beneficial innovation, in part by reducing regulatory burdens by placing the device into a lower device class than the automatic class III assignment. The automatic assignment of class III occurs by operation of law and without any action by FDA, regardless of the level of risk posed by the new device. Any device that was not in commercial distribution before May 28, 1976, is automatically classified as, and remains within, class III and requires premarket approval unless and until FDA takes an action to classify or reclassify the device (see 21 U.S.C. 360c(f)(1)). We refer to these devices as “postamendments devices” because they were not in commercial distribution prior to the date of enactment of the Medical Device Amendments of 1976, which amended the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the FD&C Act). FDA may take a variety of actions in appropriate circumstances to classify or reclassify a device into class I or II. We may issue an order finding a new device to be substantially equivalent under section 513(i) of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 360c(i)) to a predicate device that does not require premarket approval. We determine whether a new device is substantially equivalent to a predicate by means of the procedures for premarket notification under section 510(k) of the FD&C Act and part 807 (21 U.S.C. 360(k) and 21 CFR part 807, respectively). FDA may also classify a device through “De Novo” classification, a common name for the process authorized under section 513(f)(2) of the FD&C Act. Section 207 of the Food and Drug Administration Modernization Act of 1997 established the first procedure for De Novo classification (Pub. L. 105-115). Section 607 of the Food and Drug Administration Safety and Innovation Act modified the De Novo application process by adding a second procedure (Pub. L. 112-144). A device sponsor may utilize either procedure for De Novo classification. Under the first procedure, the person submits a 510(k) for a device that has not previously been classified. After receiving an order from FDA classifying the device into class III under section 513(f)(1) of the FD&C Act, the person then requests a classification under section 513(f)(2). Under the second procedure, rather than first submitting a 510(k) and then a request for classification, if the person determines that there is no legally marketed device upon which to base a determination of substantial equivalence, that person requests a classification under section 513(f)(2) of the FD&C Act. Under either procedure for De Novo classification, FDA shall classify the device by written order within 120 days. The classification will be according to the criteria under section 513(a)(1) of the FD&C Act. Although the device was automatically placed within class III, the De Novo classification is considered to be the initial classification of the device. We believe this De Novo classification will enhance patients' access to beneficial innovation, in part by reducing regulatory burdens. When FDA classifies a device into class I or II via the De Novo process, the device can serve as a predicate for future devices of that type, including for 510(k)s (see 21 U.S.C. 360c(f)(2)(B)(i)). As a result, other device sponsors do not have to submit a De Novo request or premarket approval application in order to market a substantially equivalent device (see 21 U.S.C. 360c(i), defining “substantial equivalence”). Instead, sponsors can use the less-burdensome 510(k) process, when necessary, to market their device. II. De Novo Classification On November 10, 2014, Brain Sentinel, Inc., submitted a request for De Novo classification of the Brain Sentinel Monitoring and Alerting System. FDA reviewed the request in order to classify the device under the criteria for classification set forth in section 513(a)(1) of the FD&C Act. We classify devices into class II if general controls by themselves are insufficient to provide reasonable assurance of safety and effectiveness, but there is sufficient information to establish special controls that, in combination with the general controls, provide reasonable assurance of the safety and effectiveness of the device for its intended use (see 21 U.S.C. 360c(a)(1)(B)). After review of the information submitted in the request, we determined that the device can be classified into class II with the establishment of special controls. FDA has determined that these special controls, in addition to general controls, will provide reasonable assurance of the safety and effectiveness of the device. Therefore, on February 16, 2017, FDA issued an order to the requestor classifying the device into class II. FDA is codifying the classification of the device by adding 21 CFR 882.1580. We have named the generic type of device non-EEG physiological signal based seizure monitoring system, and it is identified as a noninvasive prescription device that collects physiological signals other than EEG to identify physiological signals that may be associated with a seizure. FDA has identified the following risks to health associated specifically with this type of device and the measures required to mitigate these risks in table 1. Table 1—Non-EEG Physiological Signal Based Seizure Monitoring System Risks and Mitigation Measures
Identified risks
Mitigation measuresAdverse tissue reaction
Biocompatibility evaluation.Equipment malfunction leading to injury to users (shock, burn)
Electrical safety, thermal, and mechanical testing;Electromagnetic compatibility testing; and
                             Labeling.Interference with or from other electrical devices
Electromagnetic compatibility testing.( print page 50082)Incorrect alerts, including:• Missing a seizure—device fails to identify physiological signal that is associated with a seizure; or
                             • False alarm—device mistakenly identifies a physiological signal as being associated with a seizure
Clinical performance testing;
                             Non-clinical performance testing; 
                             Software verification, validation, and hazard analysis; 
                             Labeling; and 
                             Training.
 FDA has determined that special controls, in combination with the general controls, address these risks to health and provide reasonable assurance of the safety and effectiveness. In order for a device to fall within this classification, and thus avoid automatic classification in class III, it would have to comply with the special controls named in this final order. The necessary special controls appear in the regulation codified by this order. This device is subject to premarket notification requirements under section 510(k) of the FD&C Act. At the time of classification, non-EEG physiological signal based seizure monitoring systems are for prescription use only. Prescription devices are exempt from the requirement for adequate directions for use for the layperson under section 502(f)(1) of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 352(f)(1)) and 21 CFR 801.5, as long as the conditions of 21 CFR 801.109 are met. III. Analysis of Environmental Impact The Agency has determined under 21 CFR 25.34(b) that this action is of a type that does not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. Therefore, neither an environmental assessment nor an environmental impact statement is required. IV. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 This final order establishes special controls that refer to previously approved collections of information found in other FDA regulations. These collections of information are subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520). The collections of information in part 807, subpart E, regarding premarket notification submissions have been approved under OMB control number 0910-0120, and the collections of information in 21 CFR part 801, regarding labeling have been approved under OMB control number 0910-0485. List of Subjects in 21 CFR Part 882 Medical devices
 Therefore, under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act and under authority delegated to the Commissioner of Food and Drugs, 21 CFR part 882 is amended as follows: PART 882—NEUROLOGICAL DEVICES
 1.The authority citation for part 882 continues to read as follows: Authority:
                        21 U.S.C. 351, 360, 360c, 360e, 360j, 360
                            *l,*
                             371. 2.Add § 882.1580 to subpart B to read as follows: § 882.1580
  (a) 
                            *Identification.*
                             A non-electroencephalogram (non-EEG) physiological signal based seizure monitoring system is a noninvasive prescription device that collects physiological signals other than EEG to identify physiological signals that may be associated with a seizure. (b) 
                            *Classification.*
                             Class II (special controls). The special controls for this device are: (1) The technical parameters of the device, hardware and software, must be fully characterized and include the following information: (i) Hardware specifications must be provided. Appropriate verification, validation, and hazard analysis must be performed. (ii) Software, including any proprietary algorithm(s) used by the device to achieve its intended use, must be described in detail in the Software Requirements Specification (SRS) and Software Design Specification (SDS). Appropriate software verification, validation, and hazard analysis must be performed. (2) The patient-contacting components of the device must be demonstrated to be biocompatible. (3) The device must be designed and tested for electrical, thermal, and mechanical safety and electromagnetic compatibility (EMC). (4) Clinical performance testing must demonstrate the ability of the device to function as an assessment aid for monitoring for seizure-related activity in the intended population and for the intended use setting. Performance measurements must include positive percent agreement and false alarm rate. (5) Training must be provided for intended users that includes information regarding the proper use of the device and factors that may affect the collection of the physiologic data. (6) The labeling must include health care professional labeling and patient-caregiver labeling. The health care professional and the patient-caregiver labeling must include the following information: (i) A detailed summary of the clinical performance testing, including any adverse events and complications. (ii) Any instructions technicians and clinicians should convey to patients and caregivers regarding the proper use of the device and factors that may affect the collection of the physiologic data. (iii) Instructions to technicians and clinicians regarding how to set the device threshold to achieve the intended performance of the device.
 Dated: October 24, 2017. Lauren Silvis, Chief of Staff.


[FR Doc. 2017-23516 Filed 10-27-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164-01-P