K-numberK254200
Device nameAir Compression Leg Massager (LF-FT001, LF-FT002-1, LF-FT003, LF-FT003-1, LF-FT004-1, LF-FT005-1, LF-FT006-1, LF-FT007, LF-FT008, LF-FT009, LF-FT010, LF-FT011, LF-FT012, LF-FT013, LF-FT014, LF-FT015, LF-FT016, UM-01, UM-02, UM-03, UM-03-1, UM-04-1, UM-05-1, UM-06-1, UM-07, UM-08, UM-09, UM-10, UM-11, UM-12, UM-13, UM-14, UM-15, UM-16, AI-01, AI-02, AI-03, AI-04, AI-05, AI-06, AI01, AI02, AI03, AI-07, AI-08, AI-09, AI-10, AI-11, AI-12, AI-13, AI-14)
ApplicantWenzhou Lingfeng Electronic Technology Co., Ltd.
Product codeIRP
Device classClass II
Decision dateMay 5, 2026
DecisionSubstantially Equivalent
Regulation890.5650
AI Summary extracted from FDA summary PDF · never regenerated
Intended use

The Air Compression Leg Massager is a home healthcare device consisting of a controller, adapter, and two leg sleeves with three air chambers each (thigh, calf, foot). It provides sequential or peristaltic air compression massage to temporarily relieve minor muscle aches and pains and increase circulation in the legs. It also includes adjustable heating function for the feet and knees, with pressure and temperature adjustable across three levels.

Technological characteristics

The subject device differs from the predicate in several ways: it offers both sequential and peristaltic compression modes (predicate has sequential only); faster inflation/deflation times (0.6–13s inflation vs. 3–30s); different heating sites (knees and feet vs. calves and feet); three working modes versus six in the predicate; and adjustable sleeve sizes with Velcro design. Pressure range is 0–31 kPa (similar to predicate's 0–240 mmHg), and treatment time is 20 minutes for both.

Test standards cited

IEC 60601-1:2005+A1:2012+A2:2020 (general electrical safety); IEC 60601-1-2:2014+A1:2020 (electromagnetic compatibility); IEC 60601-1-11:2015+A1:2020 (home healthcare environment); ISO 10993-5:2009 (in vitro cytotoxicity); ISO 10993-10:2021 (skin sensitization); ISO 10993-23:2021 (irritation testing); software verification and validation testing.

Substantial equivalence argument

The subject device has identical indications for use and similar core technology (compressor and valve system inflating chambers) as the predicate device (K232965). Although specifications differ in compression modes, inflation times, heating sites, and modes, the applicant demonstrates through testing and analysis that these differences do not affect safety or effectiveness: final pressure outputs are equivalent, treatment time is the same, all safety and performance testing conforms to standards, and biocompatibility is demonstrated. Therefore, the device is substantially equivalent despite technological differences.

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 →