Coltene Brilliant
by Bauer, Cheng & Associates, Inc.
510(k) K840085
Active
Valid until
No expiry
FDA recalls
None foundDocuments
Trust
Unverified
Regulatory status
| Region | Authorization | Number | Date | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| United States | FDA 510(k)SESE | NumberK840085 | Date16 Mar 1984 | StatusActive |
Recalls
No FDA recalls found in the data synced 22 Oct 2026.
Coverage
- Active
- Expiring
- Withdrawn
- Listed
- Not covered
United States — FDA 510(k) Active
Specification
- 510(k) Number
- FDA Product Code
- EBF
- Device Class
- Class II
- Regulation
- 21 CFR Part 872.3690
- Advisory Committee
- Dental
- FDA Decision
- SESE Substantially Equivalent
Overview
AI-generated summary, 1 Oct 2026
COLTENE BRILLIANT is a dental device classified under the FDA 510(k) regulatory pathway, with a decision of Substantially Equivalent. It is associated with the Dental advisory committee and has a product code of EBF.
The device is intended for use in dental applications and is supplied as part of the COLTENE BRILLIANT product line. It is not specified as single-use or reusable, and no specific storage or size details are provided in the data.
Other devices from Bauer, Cheng & Associates, Inc.
Questions
AI-generated answers, 1 Oct 2026
What is the COLTENE BRILLIANT device intended for?
The COLTENE BRILLIANT device is intended for use in dental applications, as specified in its FDA 510(k) submission under product code EBF, which covers general dental instruments and materials.
How is the COLTENE BRILLIANT device supplied and is it single-use or reusable?
The COLTENE BRILLIANT device is supplied as part of the COLTENE BRILLIANT product line; however, the data does not specify whether it is designated for single-use or reusable application, so users should consult the manufacturer's labeling for reuse instructions.
What regulatory pathway was used for the COLTENE BRILLIANT device and what was the outcome?
The COLTENE BRILLIANT device underwent the FDA Traditional 510(k) pathway, receiving a Substantially Equivalent (SESE) decision on March 16, 1984, under K840085, indicating it met safety and effectiveness requirements compared to a predicate device.