(307 days)
The T.B.R.® ide@ conic endosseous dental implant is a device 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, and to restore the patient's chewing function.
Description of the donic/Conic dental implant system consists of selftapping threaded screw-type implants (made from Ti-6AI-4V ) and tapping througou overs with many options such as Ti-6Al-4V abutments, tapered abutments, castable abutments, ball abutments and ceramic/Titapered abutments. The system also include surgical and laboratory ord av abutiments. Implants are double-packaged and provided sterile. Implants surface is roughened to promote osseointegration.
The provided document is a 510(k) summary for a medical device (T.B.R.® ide@ conic endosseous dental implant) and does not describe acceptance criteria or a study that proves the device meets those criteria in the context of an AI/ML algorithm.
Instead, the document focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence to predicate devices based on:
- Mechanical testing: This was done in accordance with FDA guidance for root-form endosseous dental implants and abutments. It showed "sufficient mechanical static and dynamic strength."
- Biocompatibility testing: Conclusions demonstrate the safety and effectiveness of the implant system.
- Technological characteristics: A comparison table is provided highlighting similarities in type, lengths, diameters, connection, shape, materials, and surface with predicate devices.
Therefore, I cannot provide the requested information for an AI/ML device's acceptance criteria and study, as the input document describes a traditional medical device (dental implant).
The following information cannot be extracted from the provided document as it pertains to a traditional medical device submission, not an AI/ML device:
- A table of acceptance criteria and the reported device performance (for an AI/ML algorithm).
- Sample size used for the test set and the data provenance.
- Number of experts used to establish the ground truth for the test set and the qualifications of those experts.
- Adjudication method for the test set.
- If a multi-reader multi-case (MRMC) comparative effectiveness study was done, and its effect size.
- If a standalone (i.e. algorithm only without human-in-the-loop performance) was done.
- The type of ground truth used.
- The sample size for the training set.
- How the ground truth for the training set was established.
§ 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.