Search Results

Upon intravenous administration and use of an ICG drug product consistent with its approved label, the da Vinci Firefly Imaging System is intended to provide real-time endoscopic visible and nearinfrared fluorescence imaging. The da Vinci Firefly Imaging System enables surgeons to perform minimally invasive surgery using standard endoscopic visible light as well as visual assessment of vessels, blood flow and related tissue perfusion, and at least one of the major extra-hepatic bile ducts (cystic duct, common bile duct or common hepatic duct), using near infrared imaging.

Fluorescence imaging of biliary ducts with the da Vinci Firefly Imaging System is intended for use with standard of care white light and, when indicated, intraoperative cholangiography. The device is not intended for standalone use for biliary duct visualization.

Upon interstitial administration and use of an ICG drug product consistent with its approved label, the da Vinci Firefly Imaging System is used to perform intraoperative fluorescence imaging and visualization of the lymphatic system, including lymphatic vessels and lymph nodes.

The da Vinci Firefly Imaging System provides visualization in two modes: standard, visible-light imaging mode and a near-infrared fluorescence imaging mode, consisting of either a black-and-white surgical image or completely black background with the nearinfrared fluorescence depicted in a color overlay. For near-infrared fluorescence imaging, indocyanine green (ICG) fluorescence imaging agent is required.

Here's a breakdown of the acceptance criteria and the study information based on the provided text, formatted as requested:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

2. Sample Size Used for the Test Set and Data Provenance

The provided text does not explicitly state the sample size for the test set used in the "Delta validation testing" or "Delta design verification testing."

The data provenance is also not explicitly detailed. It can be inferred that the testing was conducted internally by Intuitive Surgical, Inc. as part of their design verification and validation processes. There is no mention of country of origin of the data or whether it was retrospective or prospective.

3. Number of Experts Used to Establish Ground Truth and Their Qualifications

The provided text does not provide information regarding the number of experts used or their specific qualifications for establishing ground truth within these tests. The tests are described as "validation testing" and "design verification testing" against "design requirements and specifications" and "clinical applications test cases," suggesting an internal product-centric validation rather than a clinical ground truth established by external experts in an MRMC study.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set

The provided text does not mention any adjudication method like 2+1 or 3+1. The description of testing ("met the acceptance criteria for all of the design requirements and specifications") implies a direct assessment against predefined engineering or performance metrics rather than a consensus-based review of clinical cases.

5. If a Multi-Reader Multi-Case (MRMC) Comparative Effectiveness Study Was Done, and Effect Size of Human Improvement with AI vs. Without AI Assistance

A Multi-Reader Multi-Case (MRMC) comparative effectiveness study was not conducted or reported in this document. The device is an imaging system (da Vinci Firefly Imaging System), not an AI-assisted diagnostic tool that directly aids human readers in interpretation. The filing describes a modification to an existing imaging system (change in excitation wavelength from 805nm to 785nm), and the testing focused on verifying the performance of this modified system against its design specifications and maintaining substantial equivalence. Therefore, there is no discussion of human reader improvement with or without AI assistance.

6. If a Standalone (Algorithm Only Without Human-in-the-Loop Performance) Was Done

The device is an imaging system used during surgery, and its functionality involves providing real-time visible and near-infrared fluorescence imaging to surgeons. It is inherently a human-in-the-loop device as it provides visual information for a surgeon to interpret and act upon. The text does not describe any standalone algorithmic performance without human interpretation.

7. The Type of Ground Truth Used

The "ground truth" for the testing described appears to be based on engineering design requirements and specifications for the imaging system's performance, particularly related to the 785nm fluorescence system, illumination, and compatibility. It also references "Firefly Clinical Applications test cases," which suggests scenarios designed to evaluate the system's performance in clinical contexts, likely validated against anticipated imaging results or known technical benchmarks. It does not mention expert consensus, pathology, or outcomes data as the primary ground truth for this particular submission.

8. The Sample Size for the Training Set

The provided text does not mention a training set because this submission describes a modification to a medical device (an imaging system, specifically a change in laser wavelength) and not an AI/ML algorithm that would typically require a training set. The testing performed was for verification and validation of the hardware change.

9. How the Ground Truth for the Training Set Was Established

Since there is no mention of a training set, the method for establishing its ground truth is not applicable to this document.

Ask a specific question about this device