(31 days)
The WBR- WB is indicated for the acquisition, formatting and storage of scintigraphy camera output data. It is capable of processing and displaying the acquired information in traditional formats, as well as in pseudo three dimensional renderings, and in various forms of animated sequences, showing kinetic attributes of the image organs.
The WBR - WB is an image processing system, which is interfaced to gamma cameras. The camera-acquired data is processed by the WBR - WB, which produces high resolution images. The images can be transferred to any other PACS device, which is DICOM or Interfile compatible.
The provided text describes a 510(k) submission for the WBR-WB image processing system. However, the information regarding specific acceptance criteria and the detailed study proving the device meets these criteria is very limited. The submission primarily focuses on substantial equivalence to a predicate device (K030870 WBR-HR).
Here's an analysis of the available information according to your requested points:
Device: WBR-WB Image Processing System
1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance
Acceptance Criteria: The document does not explicitly state specific quantitative acceptance criteria. Instead, it generally claims "Bench and clinical data demonstrate that processed images are equivalent or of better resolution comparing to the un - processed images."
Reported Device Performance:
| Acceptance Criteria | Reported Device Performance |
|---|---|
| Image Resolution | Equivalent or better resolution compared to un-processed images. |
| Safety | No adverse effects detected. |
2. Sample Size Used for the Test Set and Data Provenance
The document states "Bench and clinical data demonstrate..." but does not provide details about the sample size used for the test set or the data provenance (e.g., country of origin, retrospective or prospective nature).
3. Number of Experts Used to Establish Ground Truth and Qualifications
The document does not specify the number of experts or their qualifications used to establish ground truth for any test set.
4. Adjudication Method
The document does not mention any adjudication method like 2+1 or 3+1.
5. Multi-Reader Multi-Case (MRMC) Comparative Effectiveness Study
The document does not indicate that a Multi-Reader Multi-Case (MRMC) comparative effectiveness study was done, nor does it describe any effect size of human readers improving with AI vs. without AI assistance. The system described is an image processing system, not explicitly an AI-assisted diagnostic tool in the sense of providing specific interpretations.
6. Standalone (Algorithm Only) Performance Study
The document states "Bench and clinical data demonstrate that processed images are equivalent or of better resolution comparing to the un - processed images." This implies a standalone performance evaluation of the algorithm's output (processed images) against unprocessed images. However, the specific metrics and methodology of this evaluation are not detailed.
7. Type of Ground Truth Used
The document does not explicitly state the type of ground truth used. Given the nature of an image processing system for resolution improvement, it's likely that objective image quality metrics or visual assessments by experts (though not explicitly stated) would have been used. It's not pathology or outcomes data.
8. Sample Size for the Training Set
The document does not provide any information regarding a training set sample size. The submission is a 510(k) for an image processing system, which may or may not involve machine learning in the modern sense. Given the 2003 date, it's less likely to be a deep learning system with a distinct training set as understood today.
9. How the Ground Truth for the Training Set Was Established
As no training set is mentioned, this information is not provided.
Summary of Limitations in the Provided Document:
The 510(k) summary is very high-level and lacks specific details regarding the clinical study, acceptance criteria, sample sizes, expert involvement, and ground truth methodologies that would typically be expected for a comprehensive description of device validation. This is characteristic of some older 510(k) submissions, particularly for devices seeking substantial equivalence where detailed clinical trial data might not have been a primary requirement if bench testing and comparison to general performance of the predicate were deemed sufficient. The submission focuses more on the technical function of processing gamma camera data and displaying it, rather than a diagnostic aid with specific performance metrics.
{0}------------------------------------------------
Ko31874
JUL 18 2003
510(k) Summary of Safety and Effectiveness (in accordance to 21 CFR 807.87(b))
Device Name
.
Proprietary Device Name : WBR -WB.
Establishment Name and Registration Number of Submitter
Name: U.C.G. Technologies Ltd. Corresponding Official: Dan Laor Building 30, MATAM Haifa, 31905 Israel
Device Classification
Classification Code: Panel Identification: Classification Name: Common Name: Classification Class:
KPS Radiology Image processing (per 21CFR 892.1200) Imaging system Class II Product
Reason for 510(k) Submission
Simplified 510(k) Submission
Identification of Legally Marketed Equivalent Devices K030870 WBR-HR
Device Description
The WBR - WB is an image processing system, which is interfaced to gamma cameras. The camera-acquired data is processed by the WBR - WB, which produces high resolution images. The images can be transferred to any other PACS device, which is DICOM or Interfile compatible.
Intended Use of Device
The WBR- WB is indicated for acquiring gamma camera output data. It is capable of processing the acquired information, store it and display the resulted images in traditional formats.
Safety & Effectiveness
The device has been designed verified and validated complying to 21CFR 820.30 regulations. Bench and clinical data demonstrate that processed images are equivalent or of better resolution comparing to the un - processed images. No adverse affects have been detected.
Substential Equivalency
It is U.C.G. opinion that the WBR- WB is substantially equivalent in terms of safety and effectiveness to the predicate device.
{1}------------------------------------------------
Image /page/1/Picture/1 description: The image shows the seal of the Department of Health & Human Services (HHS). The seal is circular and contains the words "DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES • USA" around the perimeter. Inside the circle is an abstract image of an eagle.
Public Health Service
Food and Drug Administration 9200 Corporate Boulevard Rockville MD 20850
Mr. Dan Laor Quality Manager U.C.G. Technologies, Ltd. P.O. Box 15010, MATAM Haifa, 31905 ISRAEL
JUL 1 8 2003
Re: K031874 Trade/Device Name: WBR-WB Regulation Number: 21 CFR 892.1200 Regulation Name: Emission computed tomography system Regulatory Class: II Product Code: 90 KPS Dated: June 12, 2003 Received: June 25, 2003
Dear Mr. Laor:
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. Iisting of devices, good manufacturing practice, labeling, and prohibitions against misbranding and adulteration.
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.
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); 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.
{2}------------------------------------------------
This letter will allow you to begin marketing your device as described in your Section 510(k) premarket notification. The FDA finding of substantial equivalence of your device to a legally marketed predicate device results in a classification for your device and thus, permits your device to proceed to the market.
If you desire specific advice for your device on our labeling regulation (21 CFR Part 801), please contact the Office of Compliance at one of the following numbers, based on the regulation number at the top of the letter:
| 8xx.1xxx | (301) 594-4591 |
|---|---|
| 876.2xxx, 3xxx, 4xxx, 5xxx | (301) 594-4616 |
| 884.2xxx, 3xxx, 4xxx, 5xxx, 6xxx | (301) 594-4616 |
| 892.2xxx, 3xxx, 4xxx, 5xxx | (301) 594-4654 |
| Other | (301) 594-4692 |
Additionally, for questions on the promotion and advertising of your device, please contact the Office of Compliance at (301) 594-4639. Also, please note the regulation entitled, "Misbranding by reference to premarket notification" (21CFR Part 807.97) you may obtain. Other general information on your responsibilities under the Act may be obtained from the Division of Small Manufacturers, International and Consumer Assistance at its toll-free number (800) 638-2041 or (301) 443-6597 or at its Internet address http://www.fda.gov/cdrh/dsma/dsmamain.html.
Sincerely vours.
Nancy C. Brogdon
Nancy C. Brogdon Director, Division of Reproductive, Abdominal and Radiological Devices Office of Device Evaluation Center for Devices and Radiological Health
Enclosure
Page 2
{3}------------------------------------------------
Page 1 of 1
510(k) Number (if known): DEVICE NAME: WBR - WB
K03/874
DEVICE NAME: WBR - WB
INDICATION FOR USE: The WBR- WB is indicated for the acquisition, formatting and storage of scintigraphy camera output data. It is capable of processing and displaying the acquired information in traditional formats, as well as in pseudo three dimensional renderings, and in various forms of animated sequences, showing kinetic attributes of the image organs.
(Please do not write below this line - continue on another page if needed)
( Concurrence of CDRH, Office of Device Evaluation (ODE) )
Prescription Use
(Per 21 CFR 801.109) OR Over-the-Counter Use __
(Division Sign-Off)
Division of Reproductive, Abdominal,
and Radiological D 510(k) Number
§ 892.1200 Emission computed tomography system.
(a)
Identification. An emission computed tomography system is a device intended to detect the location and distribution of gamma ray- and positron-emitting radionuclides in the body and produce cross-sectional images through computer reconstruction of the data. This generic type of device may include signal analysis and display equipment, patient and equipment supports, radionuclide anatomical markers, component parts, and accessories.(b)
Classification. Class II.