Search Filters

Search Results

Found 1 results

510(k) Data Aggregation

    K Number
    K172352

    Validate with FDA (Live)

    Device Name
    TREFOIL System
    Manufacturer
    Date Cleared
    2017-10-20

    (78 days)

    Product Code
    Regulation Number
    872.3640
    Panel
    Dental
    Reference & Predicate Devices
    Predicate For
    AI/MLSaMDIVD (In Vitro Diagnostic)TherapeuticDiagnosticis PCCP AuthorizedThirdpartyExpeditedreview
    Intended Use

    The TREFOIL System is used to restore chewing function in fully edentulous mandibles.

    The three implants of the TREFOIL System are placed between the mental foramina in fully edentulous mandibles in a 1-stage surgical technique combined with an immediate function loading protocol, provided sufficient primary stability for the selected technique is achieved. In cases where sufficient primary stability for two implants or more is not reached, the implants along with the Framework may also be used with an early or delayed loading protocol.

    The following prerequisites must be fulfilled:

    • Adequate quantity of bone (minimum height of 13 mm for 11.5 mm implant and 14.5 mm for 13.0 implant and minimum width of 6-7 mm).
    • Adequate mouth opening (minimum 40 mm) to accommodate the guided surgery instruments.
    • Implant-supported prosthetics seated directly on dedicated implants
    Device Description

    The TREFOIL System is a method of placing three dental implants in predetermined positions (between the mental foramina) and using a pre-designed prosthetic bar to act as a screw-retained framework seated on the implants. The TREFOIL System restores chewing function and esthetics in the mandible in completely edentulous patients.

    The TREFOIL System consists of dental implants, surgical components necessary to place the implants in predetermined positions, and prosthetic components that are included in the prosthetic bar or are used in the dental lab during the creation of the prosthetic bar.

    The Trefoil Implants are made of CP4 titanium. The implants are parallel walled and have an internal conical abutment connection. The implants have a 13.0 mm threaded portion and are available with both a 4.5 and 6.0 mm collar height. The apex of the implants have cutting chambers allowing for self-tapping. The implant bone interface has the TiUnite implant surface treatment.

    AI/ML Overview

    I am sorry, but based on the provided text, there is no information about acceptance criteria or a study that proves a device meets those criteria, specifically concerning an AI/algorithm-based diagnostic device. The document is a 510(k) premarket notification for a dental implant system (TREFOIL System) and discusses its substantial equivalence to previously marketed predicate devices.

    The text does not include details about:

    • A table of acceptance criteria and reported device performance.
    • Sample sizes for test sets, data provenance, or training sets for an AI/algorithm.
    • Number or qualifications of experts, or ground truth adjudication methods.
    • Multi-reader multi-case (MRMC) comparative effectiveness studies.
    • Standalone algorithm performance.
    • Type of ground truth used (e.g., pathology, outcomes data).
    • How ground truth for any training set was established.

    The document primarily focuses on:

    • Device Description: The TREFOIL System is a dental implant system consisting of implants, surgical components, and prosthetic components for restoring chewing function in fully edentulous mandibles.
    • Predicate Devices: It compares the subject device to two predicate TREFOIL Systems (K152836 and K170135).
    • Technological Characteristics Comparison: The key difference noted is a change in implant length from 11.5 mm to 13.0 mm, which is already present in a reference predicate. All other technological characteristics (design, material, surface modification) are stated to be the same as the predicate devices.
    • Non-Clinical Testing Summary: The document explicitly states that "No clinical data was used to support the decision of safety and effectiveness." Instead, the manufacturer leveraged data from the predicate devices because the subject device "does not represent a new worst case" for aspects like sterilization, packaging, shelf life, biocompatibility, and fatigue testing.

    Therefore, I cannot fulfill your request for information about acceptance criteria and an AI/algorithm study based on the provided text.

    Ask a Question

    Ask a specific question about this device

    Page 1 of 1