eCARTv5 Clinical Deterioration Suite (“eCART”)

K233253

AgileMD, Inc. · cleared 2024-06-21 · product code QNL · Cardiovascular

FDA 510(k) summary for eCARTv5 Clinical Deterioration Suite (“eCART”) (K233253)

Constat organizes this clearance into predicate context, validation evidence, reported performance, postmarket signals, and reimbursement links. Each extracted claim stays tied to the public FDA source; missing fields remain explicitly unstated.

Validation studies
2
Cited predicates
2
Performance observations
34
Product code
QNL

Premarket evidence — what FDA accepted

Device typesamd
source quote (p.5)
“The AgileMD eCARTv5 Clinical Deterioration Suite (“eCART") is a cloud-based software device that is integrated into the electronic health record (“EHR”) in order to anticipate clinical deterioration in adult ward patients, which is signified as either of the following two predicted outcomes: (1) death or (2) ICU transfer.”
AlgorithmGradient Boosted Machine (“GBM”) learning algorithm
source quote (p.5)
“The primary functions of the system are imparted by the Gradient Boosted Machine (“GBM”) learning algorithm that takes input directly from the EHR, in real time, to provide an assessment of patients and displays its outputs in an intuitive user interface which drives providers to follow standardized clinical workflows (established by their institutions) for elevated-risk patients.”
Adaptive (vs locked)No
PCCPNo
Cybersecurity addressedNo

Validation studies (2)

Retrospective clinical

n=934,454 patients · 3 site(s)

endpoints: Deterioration; Mortality

Prospective clinical

n=151,233 patients · 3 site(s)

endpoints: Deterioration; Mortality

Reported performance (34 observations)

sensitivity0.488CI 48.7%, 49.0%
source quote (p.7)
“48.8% (48.7%, 49.0%)”
specificity0.933CI 93.3%, 93.3%
source quote (p.7)
“93.3% (93.3%, 93.3%)”
aurocas written: “auc”0.828CI 0.827, 0.829
source quote (p.7)
“0.828 (0.827, 0.829)”
aurocas written: “AUROC (Retrospective, Deterioration)”0.835CI 0.834, 0.835
source quote (p.7)
“0.835 (0.834, 0.835)”
aurocas written: “AUROC (Retrospective, Mortality)”0.923CI 0.923, 0.924
source quote (p.7)
“0.923 (0.923, 0.924)”
aurocas written: “AUROC (Prospective, Mortality)”0.913CI 0.911, 0.914
source quote (p.7)
“0.913 (0.911, 0.914)”
ppvas written: “PPV (Retrospective, Deterioration, eCART ≥93)”0.09CI 9.0%, 9.1%
source quote (p.7)
“9.0% (9.0%, 9.1%)”
npvas written: “NPV (Retrospective, Deterioration, eCART ≥93)”0.993CI 99.3%, 99.3%
source quote (p.7)
“99.3% (99.3%, 99.3%)”
ppvas written: “PPV (Prospective, Deterioration, eCART ≥93)”0.089CI 8.8%, 8.9%
source quote (p.7)
“8.9% (8.8%, 8.9%)”
npvas written: “NPV (Prospective, Deterioration, eCART ≥93)”0.993CI 99.3%, 99.3%
source quote (p.7)
“99.3% (99.3%, 99.3%)”
sensitivityas written: “Sensitivity (Retrospective, Deterioration, eCART ≥97)”0.386CI 38.5%, 38.7%
source quote (p.7)
“38.6% (38.5%, 38.7%)”
specificityas written: “Specificity (Retrospective, Deterioration, eCART ≥97)”0.969CI 96.9%, 96.9%
source quote (p.7)
“96.9% (96.9%, 96.9%)”
ppvas written: “PPV (Retrospective, Deterioration, eCART ≥97)”0.142CI 14.1%, 14.2%
source quote (p.7)
“14.2% (14.1%, 14.2%)”
npvas written: “NPV (Retrospective, Deterioration, eCART ≥97)”0.992CI 99.2%, 99.2%
source quote (p.7)
“99.2% (99.2%, 99.2%)”
sensitivityas written: “Sensitivity (Prospective, Deterioration, eCART ≥97)”0.337CI 33.6%, 33.9%
source quote (p.7)
“33.7% (33.6%, 33.9%)”
specificityas written: “Specificity (Prospective, Deterioration, eCART ≥97)”0.973CI 97.3%, 97.3%
source quote (p.7)
“97.3% (97.3%, 97.3%)”
ppvas written: “PPV (Prospective, Deterioration, eCART ≥97)”0.142CI 14.1%, 14.3%
source quote (p.7)
“14.2% (14.1%, 14.3%)”
npvas written: “NPV (Prospective, Deterioration, eCART ≥97)”0.991CI 99.1%, 99.1%
source quote (p.7)
“99.1% (99.1%, 99.1%)”
sensitivityas written: “Sensitivity (Retrospective, Mortality, eCART ≥93)”0.758CI 75.6%, 75.9%
source quote (p.7)
“75.8% (75.6%, 75.9%)”
specificityas written: “Specificity (Retrospective, Mortality, eCART ≥93)”0.926CI 92.6%, 92.6%
source quote (p.7)
“92.6% (92.6%, 92.6%)”
ppvas written: “PPV (Retrospective, Mortality, eCART ≥93)”0.019CI 1.9%, 1.9%
source quote (p.7)
“1.9% (1.9%, 1.9%)”
npvas written: “NPV (Retrospective, Mortality, eCART ≥93)”1CI 100.0%, 100.0%
source quote (p.7)
“100.0% (100.0%, 100.0%)”
sensitivityas written: “Sensitivity (Prospective, Mortality, eCART ≥93)”0.717CI 71.3%, 72.1%
source quote (p.7)
“71.7% (71.3%, 72.1%)”
specificityas written: “Specificity (Prospective, Mortality, eCART ≥93)”0.929CI 92.8%, 92.9%
source quote (p.7)
“92.9% (92.8%, 92.9%)”
ppvas written: “PPV (Prospective, Mortality, eCART ≥93)”0.018CI 1.8%, 1.8%
source quote (p.7)
“1.8% (1.8%, 1.8%)”
npvas written: “NPV (Prospective, Mortality, eCART ≥93)”0.999CI 99.9%, 99.9%
source quote (p.7)
“99.9% (99.9%, 99.9%)”
sensitivityas written: “Sensitivity (Retrospective, Mortality, eCART ≥97)”0.647CI 64.5%, 64.9%
source quote (p.7)
“64.7% (64.5%, 64.9%)”
specificityas written: “Specificity (Retrospective, Mortality, eCART ≥97)”0.965CI 96.5%, 96.5%
source quote (p.7)
“96.5% (96.5%, 96.5%)”
ppvas written: “PPV (Retrospective, Mortality, eCART ≥97)”0.034CI 3.4%, 3.4%
source quote (p.7)
“3.4% (3.4%, 3.4%)”
npvas written: “NPV (Retrospective, Mortality, eCART ≥97)”0.992CI 99.2%, 99.2%
source quote (p.7)
“99.2% (99.2%, 99.2%)”
sensitivityas written: “Sensitivity (Prospective, Mortality, eCART ≥97)”0.581CI 57.6%, 58.6%
source quote (p.7)
“58.1% (57.6%, 58.6%)”
specificityas written: “Specificity (Prospective, Mortality, eCART ≥97)”0.97CI 97.0%, 97.0%
source quote (p.7)
“97.0% (97.0%, 97.0%)”
ppvas written: “PPV (Prospective, Mortality, eCART ≥97)”0.034CI 3.4%, 3.5%
source quote (p.7)
“3.4% (3.4%, 3.5%)”
npvas written: “NPV (Prospective, Mortality, eCART ≥97)”0.999CI 99.9%, 99.9%
source quote (p.7)
“99.9% (99.9%, 99.9%)”

Each value carries its own analysis unit and task — never compare or pool across devices. Source: 510(k) summary PDF.

Predicate network

Postmarket — what happened after clearance

0
recalls in product code, 24mo
0
MAUDE reports in code, 12mo
—
vs code's own 3-yr baseline
1
drift signals on this device
  • predicate_cohort_contagion

    K233253 shares predicate K172959 with K183370 (PeraMobile and PeraWatch), whose product code MWI recorded 13 recall event(s) in the trailing 24 months.

    first seen 2026-07-29 · predicate:K172959 sibling:K183370

Recall and MAUDE counts are product-code-level (reports aren't reliably attributable to one device); a recall is shown as device-attributed only when the recall record itself lists this clearance number. Signals are descriptive observables with sources — never a judgment that the device is unsafe or drifting. Snapshot 2026-09-09.

Reimbursement — how devices like this got paid

Not yet tracked — no payment pathway indexed for this clearance (the reimbursement corpus is a growing seed set).

Applicable FDA guidance — what the submission is measured against

FDA guidance documents and guiding principles applicable to 510(k) AI/ML devices in the Cardiovascular panel. A curated reference index, not legal or regulatory advice — each item states its own status, and a draft is never binding.

Applicability is derived from the device's FDA advisory panel and pathway — cross-cutting guidances apply to every AI/ML device; panel-specific ones are flagged. Titles, dates, and links verified against fda.gov as of July 2026.

Related FDA clearances

These are recent clearances in the same FDA product-code category. Shared classification does not by itself make a device an appropriate predicate.

Constat Precedent · public FDA/CMS data · descriptive decision-support, not regulatory or reimbursement advice. Share this page: constat.dev/precedent/device/K233253