The DIO STEADY External Implant System is an endosseous dental implant is indicated for surgical placement in the upper and lower jaw arches, to provide a root form means for single or multiple units' prosthetic appliance attachment to restore a patient's chewing function. Implants can be placed with a conventional two stage surgical process with an option for transmucosal healing or they can be placed in a single stage surgical process for immediate loading. Immediate loading is restricted to the anterior mandible, based on four interforaminal placed implants, and not indicated for single unsplinted implants. Patients must be subject for dental treatment with endosseous implants.

Device Description

The DIO STEADY External Implant System is comprised of dental implants, and superstructures. The DIO STEADY External Implant System is specially designed for use in dental implant surgery. A successfully osseointegrated implant will achieve a firm implant when surgically implanted under controlled conditions, per well known clinical studies. There are intended for use in partially or fully edentulous mandibles and maxillae, in support of single or multiple-unit restorations.

AI/ML Overview

The provided 510(k) submission for the DIO STEADY External Implant System is for a dental implant, which is a physical device, not an AI/ML-driven medical device. Therefore, a significant portion of the requested information, such as acceptance criteria for AI performance, sample sizes for test/training sets, ground truth establishment, expert qualifications, and MRMC studies, is not applicable in this context.

However, I can extract and present the relevant information regarding the performance and testing conducted for this traditional medical device.

Device Name: DIO STEADY External Implant System
Predicate Device: SM Internal/External Implant System (510(k) No: K070569)
Regulatory Class: Class II

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

Acceptance Criteria Category	Specific Test/Requirement	Reported Device Performance
Material Biocompatibility	Compliance with applicable International and US regulations	Biocompatibility performed, confirming compliance.
Functional Performance	Fatigue testing according to "Guidance for industry and FDA staff Class II Special Controls Guidance Document Root-form Endosseous Dental Implants and Endosseous Dental Abutment"	Fatigue test results similar to previously cleared predicate devices, using the worst-case scenario (DIO STEADY External Fixture and an angled abutment).
Design Conformance	Conformance to design input requirements	Device functionality and conformance to design input requirements were determined through laboratory testing.
Substantial Equivalence	Demonstrates equivalence to predicate device (SM Internal/External Implant System K070569) in material, intended use, and similar design/technological characteristics.	Evaluation concluded that the DIO STEADY External Implant System is substantially equivalent to its predicate device.

2. Sample size used for the test set and the data provenance

Test Set Sample Size: Not applicable. This is a physical device, and the performance evaluation involved laboratory testing for mechanical and material properties, rather than testing on a dataset.
Data Provenance: Not applicable. The testing was conducted in a laboratory setting by the manufacturer (DIO Corporation).

3. Number of experts used to establish the ground truth for the test set and the qualifications of those experts

Not applicable. Ground truth, in the context of AI/ML, refers to annotated data. For a physical dental implant, performance is validated through engineering tests and adherence to standards, not through expert consensus on a test set.

4. Adjudication method (e.g., 2+1, 3+1, none) for the test set

Not applicable. Adjudication methods are relevant for resolving discrepancies in expert annotations for datasets, which is not pertinent to the mechanical and material testing of a dental implant.

5. If a multi-reader, multi-case (MRMC) comparative effectiveness study was done, If so, what was the effect size of how much human readers improve with AI vs without AI assistance

Not applicable. This is a physical dental implant, not an AI-assisted device.

6. If a standalone (i.e., algorithm only without human-in-the-loop performance) was done

Not applicable. This is a physical dental implant, not an algorithm.

7. The type of ground truth used

The "ground truth" for this device's performance would be established by:

Engineering Standards: Adherence to recognized international and US standards for medical device materials (e.g., ASTM F67 for CP Ti Gr4) and performance (e.g., "Guidance for industry and FDA staff Class II Special Controls Guidance Document Root-form Endosseous Dental Implants and Endosseous Dental Abutment").
Laboratory Measurements: Direct measurements of material properties and mechanical performance (e.g., fatigue strength) under controlled laboratory conditions, compared against established benchmarks or predicate device performance.

8. The sample size for the training set

Not applicable. This is a physical device, and no training set (in the AI/ML sense) was used. The device design and manufacturing processes are developed through traditional engineering methods and quality controls.

9. How the ground truth for the training set was established

Not applicable. There is no training set for this type of device. The "ground truth" for its design and manufacturing is based on established engineering principles, material science, and regulatory requirements for medical devices.

Summary

{0}------------------------------------------------

K100100

NOV 1 0 2010

Traditional 510(k) Submission

. .- - -- -- ---- -- ------ -

. .

Attachment 4

510(k) Summary

DIO STEADY External Implant System

1. Submitter	DIO Corporation1464 U-dong, Haeundae-gu, Busan, 612-020, KoreaTel.: 82-51-745-7777Fax.: 82-51-745-7778
2. US Agent /Contact Person	DIO, USATim C.J. Lee3540 Wilshire Blvd. #1104 Los Angeles,CA 90010, USATel.: 213-365-2875Fax.: 213-365-1595
3. Device Name	DIO STEADY External Implant System
4. Classification Name	Endosseous Dental Implant System
5. Device Classification	Class IIDental Devices panelRegulation Number: 21 CFR 872.3640
6. Predicate Devices	SM Internal/External Implant System(510(k) No: K070569)
7. Performance	Laboratory testing was conducted to determine device functionality and conformance to design input requirements.
8. Purpose	The purpose of this 510(k) is to modify the prior 510(k) submission for the DIO STEADY External Implant System.

36 ---

· .

...

. .

{1}------------------------------------------------

DIO STEADY External Implant System

9. Device Description

The DIO STEADY External Implant System is comprised of dental implants, and superstructures.

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

The DIO STEADY External Implant System is specially designed for use in dental implant surgery. A successfully osseointegrated implant will achieve a firm implant when surgically implanted under controlled conditions, per well known clinical studies. There are intended for use in partially or fully edentulous mandibles and maxillae, in support of single or multiple-unit restorations.

10. Packing / Labeling / Product Information

DIO STEADY External Implant System follows the guidance of the 21 CFR872.3640.

Intended Use ·

37 -

{2}------------------------------------------------

DIO STEADY External Implant System

12. Substantial Equivalence Comparison

	Subject Device	Predicate Device
ManufacturerName	DIO Corporation	DIO DENTAL IMPLANT CO.,LTD
Device Name	DIO STEADY External ImplantSystem	SM Internal/External ImplantSystem
510(k) Number	Not available yet	K070569
Intended Use	Same with predicate device	The DIO Dental Implant is and designed for use in edentulous sites in the mandible or maxilla for support of a complete denture prosthesis, terminal or intermediate abutment for fixed bridgework partial dentures, or single tooth replacements.
Material	CP Ti Gr4 (ASTM F67)	CP Ti Gr4 (ASTM F67)
Design	External Hex Type	Internal Type, Morse Tapered and External Hex Type
Screw Threads	YES	YES
ImplantDiameters(mm)	3.3/3.75/4.0/4.5/5.0/6.0	3.8/4.5/5.3
ImplantLengths(mm)	8.5/10/11.5/13/15/16	8/10/12/14
SurfaceTreatment	RBM (Resorbable Blast Media :TiO2 100%)	RBM (Resorbable Blast Media)
SterilizationMethod	Gamma	Gamma
Attachments	Various abutments and components	Various abutments and components
Product Code	DZE	DZE

Technological Characteristic Comparison

This summary of 510(K) safety and effectiveness information is being submitted in accordance with the requirements of 21 CFR & 807.93

{3}------------------------------------------------

DIO STEADY External Implant System

13. Review

The DIO STEADY External Implant System has same material and indication for use and similar design and technological characteristics as the predicate device.

The DIO STEADY External Implant System has been subjected to safety, performance and product validation prior to release. Safety tests including biocompatibility has been performed to ensure the devices comply with the applicable International and US regulations.

14. Summary of nonclinical testing

Fatigue testing was conducted according to the "Guidance for industry and FDA staff Class II Special Controls Guidance Document Root-form Endosseous Dental Implants and Endosseous Dental Abutment" with the worst case scenario of the DIO STEADY External Fixture and an angled abutment.

The fatigue test results were similar to previously cleared predicate devices.

15. Conclusion

The evaluation of the DIO STEADY External Implant System demonstrates that it may be considered substantially equivalent to its predicate device.

Date: October/ 30/ 2009

Signature

Gabmoon,Jeong/ DIO Corporation RA Staff

signature

Tim C.J. Lee/ DIO, USA Manager

39 -

Comments and I. B. B. B.

{4}------------------------------------------------

Image /page/4/Picture/1 description: The image shows a logo for the Department of Health & Human Services. The logo consists of a stylized eagle with three curved lines representing its wings. The text "DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & HUMAN" is arranged in a circular fashion around the left side of the eagle. The logo is black and white.

Food and Drug Administration 10903 New Hampshire Avenue Document Control Room -WO66-G609 Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002

Dio Corporation C/O Mr. Timothy Lee Manager Dio USA 3540 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 1104 Los Angeles, California 90010

NOV 1 0 2010

Re: K100100

Trade/Device Name: DIO STEADY External Implant System Regulation Number: 21 CFR 872.3640 Regulation Name: Endosseous Dental Implant Regulatory Class: II Product Code: DZE Dated: October 7, 2010 Received: October 19, 2010

Dear Mr. Lee:

We have reviewed your Section 510(k) premarket notification of intent to market the device referenced above and have determined the device is substantially equivalent (for the indications for use stated in the enclosure) to legally marketed predicate devices marketed in interstate commerce prior to May 28, 1976, the enactment date of the Medical Device Amendments, or to devices that have been reclassified in accordance with the provisions of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (Act) that do not require approval of a premarket approval application (PMA). You may, therefore, market the device, subject to the general controls provisions of the Act. The general controls provisions of the Act include requirements for annual registration, listing of devices, good manufacturing practice, labeling, and prohibitions against misbranding and adulteration. Please note: CDRH does not evaluate information related to contract liability warranties. We remind you, however, that device labeling must be truthful and not misleading.

If your device is classified (see above) into either class II (Special Controls) or class III (PMA), it may be subject to additional controls. Existing major regulations affecting your device can be found in the Code of Federal Regulations, Title 21, Parts 800 to 898. In addition, FDA may publish further announcements concerning your device in the Federal Register.

{5}------------------------------------------------

Page 2- Mr. Lee

· Please be advised that FDA's issuance of a substantial equivalence determination does not mean that FDA has made a determination that your device complies with other requirements of the Act or any Federal statutes and regulations administered by other Federal agencies. You must comply with all the Act's requirements, including, but not limited to: registration and listing (21 CFR Part 807); labeling (21 CFR Part 801); medical device reporting (reporting of medical device-related adverse events) (21 CFR 803); good manufacturing practice requirements as set forth in the quality systems (QS) regulation (21 CFR Part 820); and if applicable, the electronic product radiation control provisions (Sections 531-542 of the Act); 21 CFR 1000-1050.

If you desire specific advice for your device on our labeling regulation (21 CFR Part 801), please go to

http://www.fda.gov/AboutFDA/CentersOffices/CDRH/CDRHOffices/ucm115809.htm for the Center for Devices and Radiological Health's (CDRH's) Office of Compliance. Also, please note the regulation entitled, "Misbranding by reference to premarket notification" (21CFR Part 807.97). For questions regarding the reporting of adverse events under the MDR regulation (21 CFR Part 803), please go to

http://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/Safety/ReportaProblem/default.htm for the CDRH's Office of Surveillance and Biometrics/Division of Postmarket Surveillance.

You may obtain other general information on your responsibilities under the Act from the Division of Small Manufacturers, International and Consumer Assistance at its toll-free number (800) 638-2041 or (301) 796-7100 or at its Internet address http://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/Resourcesfor You/Industry/default.htm.

Sincerely yours.

Susan Tunne

Anthony D. Watson, B.S., M.S., M.B.A. Director

Division of Anesthesiology, General Hospital, Infection Control and Dental Devices Office of Device Evaluation Center for Devices and

Radiological Health

Enclosure

{6}------------------------------------------------

Traditional 510(k) Submission

DIO STEADY External Implant System

Attachment 2

Indications for Use Statement

NOV 1 0 2010

K100100 510(K) Number (if known):

Device Name: DIO STEADY External Implant System

Indications For Use:

KOGION

Prescription Use -----------S AND/OR Over - The-Counter Use (Part 21 CFR 801 Subpart D) (Per 21 CFR 801.109)

(PLEASE DO NOT WRITE BELOW THIS LINE-CONTINUE ON ANOTHER PAGE IF NEEDED)

un m Concurrence of CDRH, Office of Device Evaluation (ODE) (Division Sign-Off) Page 1 of 1 Division of Anesthestology, General Hospital Infection Control, Dental Devices

510(k) Number:

Regulation Number and Section

§ 872.3640 Endosseous dental implant.

(a)
Identification. An endosseous dental implant is a prescription device made of a material such as titanium or titanium alloy that is intended to be surgically placed in the bone of the upper or lower jaw arches to provide support for prosthetic devices, such as artificial teeth, in order to restore a patient's chewing function.(b)
Classification. (1) Class II (special controls). The device is classified as class II if it is a root-form endosseous dental implant. The root-form endosseous dental implant is characterized by four geometrically distinct types: Basket, screw, solid cylinder, and hollow cylinder. The guidance document entitled “Class II Special Controls Guidance Document: Root-Form Endosseous Dental Implants and Endosseous Dental Implant Abutments” will serve as the special control. (See § 872.1(e) for the availability of this guidance document.)(2)
Classification. Class II (special controls). The device is classified as class II if it is a blade-form endosseous dental implant. The special controls for this device are:(i) The design characteristics of the device must ensure that the geometry and material composition are consistent with the intended use;
(ii) Mechanical performance (fatigue) testing under simulated physiological conditions to demonstrate maximum load (endurance limit) when the device is subjected to compressive and shear loads;
(iii) Corrosion testing under simulated physiological conditions to demonstrate corrosion potential of each metal or alloy, couple potential for an assembled dissimilar metal implant system, and corrosion rate for an assembled dissimilar metal implant system;
(iv) The device must be demonstrated to be biocompatible;
(v) Sterility testing must demonstrate the sterility of the device;
(vi) Performance testing to evaluate the compatibility of the device in a magnetic resonance (MR) environment;
(vii) Labeling must include a clear description of the technological features, how the device should be used in patients, detailed surgical protocol and restoration procedures, relevant precautions and warnings based on the clinical use of the device, and qualifications and training requirements for device users including technicians and clinicians;
(viii) Patient labeling must contain a description of how the device works, how the device is placed, how the patient needs to care for the implant, possible adverse events and how to report any complications; and
(ix) Documented clinical experience must demonstrate safe and effective use and capture any adverse events observed during clinical use.