K-numberK253149
Device nameMotion InBra (YM-8801) wearable breast pump
ApplicantMedela, LLC
Product codeHGX
Device classClass II
Decision dateFeb 13, 2026
DecisionSubstantially Equivalent
Regulation884.5160
AI Summary extracted from FDA summary PDF · never regenerated
Intended use

The Motion InBra (YM-8801) is a wearable powered breast pump intended for lactating women to express and collect milk from their breasts for single-user home use. It operates via a rechargeable lithium-ion battery, features a microcontroller-managed system, and includes a 2-phase expression technology (stimulation and expression modes) with adjustable vacuum levels from 80-280 mmHg and cycling rates from 35-120 cycles per minute depending on mode.

Technological characteristics

The subject device differs from the predicate Lucy Breast Pump in vacuum level ranges (80-160 mmHg vs 75-280 mmHg in stimulation), cycling rates (100-120 cpm vs 30-100 cpm in stimulation), number of suction levels (9 levels vs 4 for expression and 3 for stimulation), and materials (polypropylene breast shield with silicone inserts and ABS motor housing vs circular polypropylene flange). Both share wearable design, lithium-ion power, microcontroller cycling control, 2-phase expression patterns, backflow protection, and adjustable suction levels.

Test standards cited

Biocompatibility testing per ISO 10993-5:2009 (cytotoxicity), ISO 10993-10:2021 (sensitization and irritation); electrical safety per ANSI/AAMI ES60601-1:2005/A2:2010, IEC 62133-2:2017, and IEC 60601-1-11:2015; electromagnetic compatibility per IEC 60601-1-2:2014 and FDA EMC guidance (June 2022); software evaluated per 2023 FDA guidance on device software functions.

Substantial equivalence argument

The subject device has the same indications for use, patient population, regulatory classification, and core technological features (wearable design, 2-phase expression, lithium-ion power, backflow protection) as the predicate Lucy Breast Pump. Although there are differences in vacuum specifications, materials, and suction level increments, the applicant argues these differences do not raise new safety or effectiveness concerns because both devices function identically in intended purpose and all performance testing (vacuum verification, backflow protection, use-life, battery performance, and biocompatibility) demonstrates the subject device is as safe and effective as the predicate.

Extracted by AI from the official FDA summary PDF →
Source

View the full FDA submission: accessdata.fda.gov

Researching this as a predicate?
Want a transparent AI-ranking score, AI-discovered related predicates, ongoing safety and warning-letter monitoring, full predicate chain lineage, and a drafted SE rationale — all saved to your own project? That's what an account adds.
Start free trial →

Everything you need for a 510(k) submission. Nothing you don't.

14-day free trial. No setup. Cancel anytime.

Start free trial →
Building an AI or ML-enabled device? Predicate search, PCCP tracking, and AI-specific FDA intelligence — built exclusively for AI/ML devices. Try AIFDA Intel →