Shenzhen TPH Technology Co., Ltd. · Class II · Cleared Feb 21, 2025
| K-number | K242850 |
| Device name | Wearable breast pump (model W8) |
| Applicant | Shenzhen TPH Technology Co., Ltd. |
| Product code | HGX |
| Device class | Class II |
| Decision date | Feb 21, 2025 |
| Decision | Substantially Equivalent |
| Regulation | 884.5160 |
The Wearable Breast Pump (Model W8) is a powered, wearable breast pump designed for lactating women to express and collect milk from their breasts for single-user use. It operates as a single pumping system with four modes (Expression, Massage, Auto, and Stimulation), features an LED display, rechargeable Li-ion battery, and adjustable suction levels controlled by a microprocessor.
Compared to the predicate device (S12), the W8 has a higher suction strength range (40-245 mmHg vs. 35-245 mmHg), increased cycle speeds across modes (77-127 vs. 70-114 cycles/minute for stimulation), adds Massage and Auto modes not present in S12, includes 15 suction levels versus 9, and features a long-press user control option. Core components remain similar: Li-ion battery power, microprocessor control, polypropylene milk collector, silicone flange/valve, and ABS housing.
IEC 60601-1:2005 (medical electrical equipment general safety), IEC 60601-1-11:2015 (home healthcare environment requirements), IEC 60601-1-2:2014/A1:2021 (electromagnetic compatibility), IEC 62133-2:2017 (lithium battery safety), ISO 10993-5:2009 (cytotoxicity), ISO 10993-10:2021 (sensitization and irritation), and FDA 2023 guidance on device software functions.
The W8 shares the same intended use, patient population, anatomical site, classification, product code, and core functional mechanism (microprocessor-controlled milk expression) as the predicate S12. Although the W8 has enhanced specifications (higher suction ranges, additional operating modes, more suction levels), these differences represent engineering refinements that do not introduce new safety or effectiveness concerns. Performance testing confirms device specifications are met, biocompatibility testing shows materials are non-toxic and non-irritating, and electrical safety/EMC testing confirms compliance with applicable standards. The technological differences do not raise different questions about safety and effectiveness compared to the established predicate.
View the full FDA submission: accessdata.fda.gov