Alma Lasers, Inc.
510(k) · clearedClass IIK101147EU
Cleared2007Studies255Trials0
Venus Bliss — FDA clearance record and published evidence
Venus Concept USA, Inc. · Body Contouring · Non-invasive laser lipolysis
510(k) · clearedClass IIK220592
PathwayPathwayA 510(k) clearance means FDA agreed the device is substantially equivalent to a device already legally on the market. It is a clearance, not an approval: it is not a finding that the device is effective, and not a comparison against any other product.
Methodology →510(k) · cleared
Methodology →510(k) · cleared
ClassII
First cleared2019
Years on marketYears on marketDerived: the data run date minus the first matched FDA decision date. Arithmetic on a real date, nothing else.
Methodology →7
Methodology →7
StudiesStudiesPubMed records for a fixed query about the MODALITY, not the brand. It measures how much has been published about a technique. It is not a quality score, not an efficacy measure, not a count of randomised trials, and not comparable between modalities of different ages. It says nothing about this brand specifically.
Methodology →112
Methodology →112
TrialsTrialsClinicalTrials.gov studies for a fixed query about the MODALITY, not the brand. Registration is not completion, not publication and not a result. Counts include studies of any status, size or sponsor, and the recruiting figure is a snapshot taken on the run date. Device studies are under-registered relative to drug studies.
Methodology →0
Methodology →0
A 510(k) device is cleared, not approved — a different route, not a lesser one. What this measuresA 510(k) clearance means FDA agreed the device is substantially equivalent to a device already legally on the market. It is a clearance, not an approval: it is not a finding that the device is effective, and not a comparison against any other product. It measures how much has been published about a technique. It is not a quality score, not an efficacy measure, not a count of randomised trials, and not comparable between modalities of different ages. It says nothing about this brand specifically.
Methodology →
Shares treatment areas — not a recommendation. What this measuresPicked mechanically, by rule and nothing else: products in the same Index category that share the most derived treatment areas with this one, ties broken alphabetically. Treatment areas are themselves derived by a published keyword rule run over a real source string, not copied from the cleared or approved indication, so a shared area means two products' source strings happened to use the same word. It does not mean the two products do the same job, it is not a claim that they are interchangeable, and it is not a recommendation.
Methodology →
Overview
- Modality
- Non-invasive laser lipolysis
- Manufacturer
- Venus Concept USA, Inc.
- Category
- Body Contouring
- Latest decision
- FDA records
- 3
- Mapping
- Verified
Mapping is the weakest link on this page; the rule is published. What this measuresThree records whose device_name is 'Venus Bliss' or 'Venus BlissMAX', applicant Venus Concept USA, Inc. Modality set to laser-lipolysis-noninvasive for the diode-laser fat-reduction function; the BlissMAX RF and EMS applicators are not separately represented. A mapping is the weakest link on this page: if it is wrong, every number above it is about the wrong product. It is stated in full so it can be checked.
Methodology →
Regulatory
| Identifier | Type | Role | FDA record |
|---|---|---|---|
| K190743 | 510(k) — cleared | — | Open → |
| K213308 | 510(k) — cleared | — | Open → |
| K220592 | 510(k) — cleared | Primary | Open → |
| Code | FDA device name | 21 CFR |
|---|---|---|
| PBX | Massager, Vacuum, Radio Frequency Induced Heat | 878.4400 |
Cleared indication: not transcribed here — read it on K220592 → Cleared indicationopenFDA's release of this database does not return the indications-for-use text, and this Index will not paraphrase a regulatory statement it has not transcribed. A 510(k) clearance means FDA agreed the device is substantially equivalent to a device already legally on the market. It is a clearance, not an approval: it is not a finding that the device is effective, and not a comparison against any other product.
Methodology →
Evidence
Counted for the modality, never the brand.
112PubMed, all time
49PubMed, 10y
0Studies
0Recruiting
| Non-invasive laser lipolysis | |
|---|---|
| 2016 | 8 |
| 2017 | 6 |
| 2018 | 8 |
| 2019 | 2 |
| 2020 | 4 |
| 2021 | 10 |
| 2022 | 7 |
| 2023 | 5 |
| 2024 | 4 |
| 2025 | 3 |
| 2026 | 1 |
3papers · 2025 · modality, not brand−25%
PubMed counts publications; ClinicalTrials.gov counts registrations. Neither is a quality score. What this measuresPubMed record counts and ClinicalTrials.gov study counts for a fixed query about the MODALITY, never the brand. It measures how much has been published about a technique. It is not a quality score, not an efficacy measure, not a count of randomised trials, and not comparable between modalities of different ages. It says nothing about this brand specifically. Registration is not completion, not publication and not a result. Counts include studies of any status, size or sponsor, and the recruiting figure is a snapshot taken on the run date. Device studies are under-registered relative to drug studies. The same counts apply to every other product in the Index on this modality: Emerald Laser, SculpSure, Zerona. The trend line is the same fixed modality query windowed per publication year. Number of PubMed records matching each modality's fixed, hand-written title/abstract query, windowed to a single publication year. It measures publication volume about a TECHNIQUE, not a brand. It is NOT a quality score, NOT an efficacy measure, and NOT a count of randomised trials. 2026 is a partial year (run date 2026-07-26); its bar is short because the year is short, not because interest fell. 2026 contains only papers indexed by the run date (2026-07-26). Render it visually distinct (e.g. hollow/hatched) or annotate it; never let it read as a decline.
Methodology →
PubMed query, verbatim
(("1060 nm"[tiab] OR "1,060 nm"[tiab] OR "hyperthermic laser"[tiab] OR "laser lipolysis"[tiab] OR "low-level laser"[tiab]) AND (lipolysis[tiab] OR "fat reduction"[tiab] OR "body contouring"[tiab] OR adipocyte*[tiab])) AND (noninvasive[tiab] OR non-invasive[tiab] OR subcutaneous[tiab] OR abdomen[tiab] OR flank*[tiab] OR skin[tiab])
ClinicalTrials.gov query, verbatim
intervention: ("laser lipolysis" OR "1060 nm laser" OR "low level laser fat reduction") condition: ("body contouring" OR "subcutaneous fat" OR "fat reduction" OR cosmetic)
Treatment areas
What matched, and where
| Area | Matched term | Source string |
|---|---|---|
| Fat & body contouring | body contouring | ClinicalTrials.gov condition query for Non-invasive laser lipolysis |
Derived by keyword rule, not the cleared or approved indication. What this measuresTreatment areas are DERIVED, not copied from an FDA field. A fixed keyword list is run over two real strings: the ClinicalTrials.gov condition query actually executed for this product's modality on the run date, and the device names of the FDA product codes attached to this product's records. The words "skin" and "cosmetic" are ignored because every query contains one of them. An area is not the cleared or approved indication — openFDA's 510(k) response does not carry the indications-for-use text, and this Index does not paraphrase it.
Methodology →
Sources
- openFDA query run for this producthttps://api.fda.gov/device/510k.json?search=device_name:%22Venus%20Bliss%22&sort=decision_date:desc&limit=100
- openFDA query run for this producthttps://api.fda.gov/device/510k.json?search=device_name:%22Bliss%22&sort=decision_date:desc&limit=100
- openFDA query run for this producthttps://api.fda.gov/device/510k.json?search=applicant:%22Venus%20Concept%22&sort=decision_date:desc&limit=100
- openFDA classification record for product code PBXhttps://api.fda.gov/device/classification.json?search=product_code:%22PBX%22&limit=1
- FDA public record for K220592https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfPMN/pmn.cfm?ID=K220592
- PubMed count, all timehttps://eutils.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/eutils/esearch.fcgi?db=pubmed&retmode=json&rettype=count&term=%28%28%221060%20nm%22%5Btiab%5D%20OR%20%221%2C060%20nm%22%5Btiab%5D%20OR%20%22hyperthermic%20laser%22%5Btiab%5D%20OR%20%22laser%20lipolysis%22%5Btiab%5D%20OR%20%22low-level%20laser%22%5Btiab%5D%29%20AND%20%28lipolysis%5Btiab%5D%20OR%20%22fat%20reduction%22%5Btiab%5D%20OR%20%22body%20contouring%22%5Btiab%5D%20OR%20adipocyte%2A%5Btiab%5D%29%29%20AND%20%28noninvasive%5Btiab%5D%20OR%20non-invasive%5Btiab%5D%20OR%20subcutaneous%5Btiab%5D%20OR%20abdomen%5Btiab%5D%20OR%20flank%2A%5Btiab%5D%20OR%20skin%5Btiab%5D%29
- PubMed count, last 10 yearshttps://eutils.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/eutils/esearch.fcgi?db=pubmed&retmode=json&rettype=count&term=%28%28%221060%20nm%22%5Btiab%5D%20OR%20%221%2C060%20nm%22%5Btiab%5D%20OR%20%22hyperthermic%20laser%22%5Btiab%5D%20OR%20%22laser%20lipolysis%22%5Btiab%5D%20OR%20%22low-level%20laser%22%5Btiab%5D%29%20AND%20%28lipolysis%5Btiab%5D%20OR%20%22fat%20reduction%22%5Btiab%5D%20OR%20%22body%20contouring%22%5Btiab%5D%20OR%20adipocyte%2A%5Btiab%5D%29%29%20AND%20%28noninvasive%5Btiab%5D%20OR%20non-invasive%5Btiab%5D%20OR%20subcutaneous%5Btiab%5D%20OR%20abdomen%5Btiab%5D%20OR%20flank%2A%5Btiab%5D%20OR%20skin%5Btiab%5D%29%20AND%20%28%222016%2F01%2F01%22%5Bdp%5D%20%3A%20%222026%2F12%2F31%22%5Bdp%5D%29
- ClinicalTrials.gov, all studieshttps://clinicaltrials.gov/api/v2/studies?query.intr=%28%22laser%20lipolysis%22%20OR%20%221060%20nm%20laser%22%20OR%20%22low%20level%20laser%20fat%20reduction%22%29&query.cond=%28%22body%20contouring%22%20OR%20%22subcutaneous%20fat%22%20OR%20%22fat%20reduction%22%20OR%20cosmetic%29&countTotal=true&pageSize=1&fields=NCTId
- ClinicalTrials.gov, recruiting onlyhttps://clinicaltrials.gov/api/v2/studies?query.intr=%28%22laser%20lipolysis%22%20OR%20%221060%20nm%20laser%22%20OR%20%22low%20level%20laser%20fat%20reduction%22%29&query.cond=%28%22body%20contouring%22%20OR%20%22subcutaneous%20fat%22%20OR%20%22fat%20reduction%22%20OR%20cosmetic%29&filter.overallStatus=RECRUITING&countTotal=true&pageSize=1&fields=NCTId
No adverse-event data is published anywhere on this site. What this measuresNo adverse-event data appears anywhere on this site. MAUDE and FAERS were never queried: those counts have no denominator, reporting is voluntary and duplicated, and a report is not evidence of causation. Publishing them beside a brand name would mislead.
Methodology →