The EXPEDIUM and VIPER Systems are intended to provide immobilization and stabilization of spinal segments in skeletally mature patients as an adjunct to fusion in the treatment of acute and chronic instabilities or deformities of the thoracic, lumbar and sacral spine.

The EXPEDIUM and VIPER Systems are intended for noncervical pedicle fixation and nonpedicle fixation for the following indications: degenerative disc disease (defined as back pain of discogenic origin with degeneration of the disc confirmed by history and radiographic studies); spondylolisthesis; trauma (i.e., fracture or dislocation); spinal stenosis; curvatures (i.e., scoliosis, kyphosis, and/or lordosis); tumor; pseudarthrosis; and failed previous fusion in skeletally mature patients.

When used in a percutaneous approach with MIS Instrumentation, the VIPER Systems are intended for noncervical pedicle fixation and nonpedicle fixation for the following indications: degenerative disc disease (defined as back pain of discogenic origin with degeneration of the disc confirmed by history and radiographic studies); spondylolisthesis; trauma (i.e., fracture or dislocation); spinal stenosis; curvatures (i.e., scoliosis, and/or lordosis); tumor; pseudoarthrosis; and failed previous fusion in skeletally mature patients.

Device Description

The proposed cortical fix polyaxial screws for EXPEDIUM and VIPER System are available in various geometries and sizes.

AI/ML Overview

The provided 510(k) summary (K110216) describes the DePuy Spine EXPEDIUM® and VIPER® Systems. This device is a spinal fixation system, and the submission focuses on new cortical fix polyaxial screws for these systems.

Here's the breakdown of the acceptance criteria and study information:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance:

Test	Acceptance Criteria	Reported Device Performance
Static cantilever beam testing (ASTM F 1798-97)	The specific acceptance criteria are not detailed (e.g., maximum deflection, yield strength, etc.), but the document states: "The acceptance criteria was/were met."	Met
Static axial slip testing (ASTM F 1798-97)	The specific acceptance criteria are not detailed (e.g., maximum slip allowed), but the document states: "The acceptance criteria was/were met."	Met
Dynamic cantilever beam testing (ASTM F 1798-97)	The specific acceptance criteria are not detailed (e.g., number of cycles to failure at a given load, fatigue limit), but the document states: "The acceptance criteria was/were met."	Met

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

The document explicitly states: "No clinical tests were performed." Therefore, there is no information regarding a test set sample size or data provenance from a human study. The testing performed was mechanical.

3. Number of Experts Used to Establish the Ground Truth for the Test Set and Qualifications:

Not applicable, as no clinical tests were performed. The "ground truth" for the mechanical tests would be the established engineering standards (ASTM F 1798-97) and the physical measurements against those standards. These would be assessed by engineers/technicians performing the tests.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set:

Not applicable, as no clinical tests were performed involving human readers or interpretation.

5. If a Multi-Reader Multi-Case (MRMC) Comparative Effectiveness Study was done:

No, an MRMC comparative effectiveness study was not done. The submission states, "No clinical tests were performed."

6. If a Standalone (algorithm only without human-in-the-loop performance) was done:

Not applicable, as this device is a physical medical implant (spinal fixation system), not a software algorithm.

7. The Type of Ground Truth Used:

For the mechanical tests performed, the "ground truth" is defined by the ASTM F 1798-97 Standard Guide for Evaluating the Static and Fatigue Properties of Interconnection Mechanisms and Subassemblies Used in Spinal Arthrodesis Implants. The device's performance was compared against the requirements and specifications outlined in this standard.

8. The Sample Size for the Training Set:

Not applicable. This device is a physical implant, not a machine learning or AI algorithm, so there is no training set in the conventional sense. The "development" or "design" process for such a device involves engineering principles, material science, and manufacturing processes, rather than data-driven algorithm training.

9. How the Ground Truth for the Training Set was Established:

Not applicable, as there is no training set for this type of device.

Summary

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

K110216

APR - 1 20i1

510(K) SUMMARY

Submitter:	DePuy Spine, Inc.325 Paramount DriveRaynham, MA 02767
Contact Person:	Eugene BangRegulatory Affairs AssociateVoice: (508) 977-3966Fax: (508) 828-3797Email: ebang@its.jnj.com
Date Prepared:	January 24, 2011
Trade Name:	EXPEDIUM® and VIPER® Systems
Device Class:	Class III
Product Code(s):	NKB, KWQ, KWP, MNH, MNI
Common Name:	Appliance, Fixation, Spinal Interlaminal;Appliance, Fixation, Spinal Intervertebral Body;Orthosis, Spondyloisthesis Spinal Fixation;Orthosis, Spinal Pedicle Fixation;Orthosis, Spinal Pedicle Fixation, For Degenerative Disc Disease
Classification Name:	Spinal interlaminar fixation orthosisper 21 CFR §888.3050
	Spinal intervertebral body fixation orthosisper 21 CFR §888.3060
	Pedicle screw spinal fixationper 21 CFR §888.3070
Predicate Devices:	EXPEDIUM® System - K033901, K051024, K062174, K063156, K063741,K080313, K081898VIPER® System - K033901, K090648, K101993
Device Description:	The proposed cortical fix polyaxial screws for EXPEDIUM and VIPER Systemare available in various geometries and sizes.
Intended Use:	The EXPEDIUM and VIPER Systems are intended to provide immobilizationand stabilization of spinal segments in skeletally mature patients as an adjunct tofusion in the treatment of acute and chronic instabilities or deformities of thethoracic, lumbar and sacral spine.The EXPEDIUM and VIPER Systems are intended for noncervical pediclefixation and nonpedicle fixation for the following indications: degenerative discdisease (defined as back pain of discogenic origin with degeneration of the discconfirmed by history and radiographic studies); spondylolisthesis; trauma (i.e.,fracture or dislocation); spinal stenosis; curvatures (i.e., scoliosis, kyphosis,and/or lordosis); tumor; pseudarthrosis; and failed previous fusion in skeletallymature patients.When used in a percutaneous approach with MIS Instrumentation, the VIPERSystems are intended for noncervical pedicle fixation and nonpedicle fixation forthe following indications: degenerative disc disease (defined as back pain ofdiscogenic origin with degeneration of the disc confirmed by history andradiographic studies); spondylolisthesis; trauma (i.e., fracture or dislocation);spinal stenosis; curvatures (i.e., scoliosis, kyphosis, and/or lordosis); tumor;pseudoarthrosis; and failed previous fusion in skeletally mature patients.
Materials:	Manufactured from ASTM F138 implant grade stainless steel and ASTM F136implant grade titanium alloy.
Comparison toPredicate Device:	The substantial equivalence of the subject device to the predicates indentifiedabove is based upon the equivalence of intended use, design (fundamentalscientific technology), materials, manufacturing methods, performance, sterility,biocompatibility, safety and packaging design.
Non-clinical Test
Summary:	The following mechanical tests were conducted:
	Static cantilever beam testing in accordance with ASTM F 1798-97 StandardGuide for Evaluating the Static and Fatigue Properties of InterconnectionMechanisms and Subassemblies Used in Spinal Arthrodesis Implants. Theacceptance criteria was/were met. Static axial slip testing in accordance with ASTM F 1798-97 Standard Guidefor Evaluating the Static and Fatigue Properties of InterconnectionMechanisms and Subassemblies Used in Spinal Arthrodesis Implants. Theacceptance criteria was/were met. Dynamic cantilever beam testing in accordance with ASTM F 1798-97Standard Guide for Evaluating the Static and Fatigue Properties ofInterconnection Mechanisms and Subassemblies Used in Spinal ArthrodesisImplants. The acceptance criteria was/were met.
Clinical Test
Summary:	No clinical tests were performed.
Conclusion:	Based on the predicate comparison and testing, the subject additions to theEXPEDIUM and VIPER Systems are substantially equivalent to the predicatedevices.

DePuy Spine, Inc., a Johnson & Johnson Company

Page 21

pag 1 of 3

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

pg 2 of 3

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

长川口16

page 3 of 3

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

Image /page/3/Picture/1 description: The image shows the logo for the Department of Health & Human Services USA. The logo consists of a circular seal with the text "DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES USA" arranged around the perimeter. Inside the circle is a stylized eagle emblem with three parallel lines forming the body and wings.

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

APR - 1 2011

DePuy Spine, Inc. % Mr. Eugene Bang Regulatory Affairs Associate 325 Paramount Drive Raynham, Massachusetts 02767

Re: K110216

Trade/Device Name: EXPEDIUM® and VIPER® Systems Regulation Number: 21 CFR 888.3070 Regulation Name: Pedicle screw spinal system Regulatory Class: Class III Product Code: NKB, MNH, MNI, KWP, KWQ Dated: January 24, 2011 Received: October 12, 2010

Dear Mr. Bang:

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.

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

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

Page 2 - Mr. Eugene Bang

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.

Azi B. De tu
for

Mark N. Melkerson Director Division of Surgical, Orthopedic And Restorative Devices Office of Device Evaluation Center for Devices and Radiological Health

Enclosure

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

INDICATIONS FOR USE STATEMENT

510(k) Number (if known): KI | 0216

Device Name: EXPEDIUM® and VIPER® Systems

Indications For Use:

The EXPEDIUM and VIPER Systems are intended for noncervical pedicle fixation and nonpedicle fixation for the following indications: degenerative disc disease (defined as back pain of discogenic origin with degeneration of the disc confirmed by history and radiographic studies); spondylolisthesis; trauma (i.e., fracture or dislocation); spinal stenosis; curvatures (i.e., scoliosis, kyphosis, and/or lordosis); turnor; pseudarthrosis; and failed previous fusion in skeletally mature patients.

Prescription Use

AND/OR

Over-The-Counter Use

(Part 21 CFR 801 Subpart D)

(21 CFR 807 Subpart C)

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

Concurrence of CDRH, Office of Device Evaluation (ODE)

(Division Sire Division of Smarcal, Orthopedic, and Restorative Devices

K110216 510(k) Number_

pag 1 of 1

Regulation Number and Section

§ 888.3070 Thoracolumbosacral pedicle screw system.

(a)
Identification. (1) Rigid pedicle screw systems are comprised of multiple components, made from a variety of materials that allow the surgeon to build an implant system to fit the patient's anatomical and physiological requirements. Such a spinal implant assembly consists of a combination of screws, longitudinal members (e.g., plates, rods including dual diameter rods, plate/rod combinations), transverse or cross connectors, and interconnection mechanisms (e.g., rod-to-rod connectors, offset connectors).(2) Semi-rigid systems are defined as systems that contain one or more of the following features (including but not limited to): Non-uniform longitudinal elements, or features that allow more motion or flexibility compared to rigid systems.
(b)
Classification. (1) Class II (special controls), when intended to provide immobilization and stabilization of spinal segments in skeletally mature patients as an adjunct to fusion in the treatment of the following acute and chronic instabilities or deformities of the thoracic, lumbar, and sacral spine: severe spondylolisthesis (grades 3 and 4) of the L5-S1 vertebra; degenerative spondylolisthesis with objective evidence of neurologic impairment; fracture; dislocation; scoliosis; kyphosis; spinal tumor; and failed previous fusion (pseudarthrosis). These pedicle screw spinal systems must comply with the following special controls:(i) Compliance with material standards;
(ii) Compliance with mechanical testing standards;
(iii) Compliance with biocompatibility standards; and
(iv) Labeling that contains these two statements in addition to other appropriate labeling information:
“Warning: The safety and effectiveness of pedicle screw spinal systems have been established only for spinal conditions with significant mechanical instability or deformity requiring fusion with instrumentation. These conditions are significant mechanical instability or deformity of the thoracic, lumbar, and sacral spine secondary to severe spondylolisthesis (grades 3 and 4) of the L5-S1 vertebra, degenerative spondylolisthesis with objective evidence of neurologic impairment, fracture, dislocation, scoliosis, kyphosis, spinal tumor, and failed previous fusion (pseudarthrosis). The safety and effectiveness of these devices for any other conditions are unknown.”
“Precaution: The implantation of pedicle screw spinal systems should be performed only by experienced spinal surgeons with specific training in the use of this pedicle screw spinal system because this is a technically demanding procedure presenting a risk of serious injury to the patient.”
(2) Class II (special controls), when a rigid pedicle screw system is intended to provide immobilization and stabilization of spinal segments in the thoracic, lumbar, and sacral spine as an adjunct to fusion in the treatment of degenerative disc disease and spondylolisthesis other than either severe spondylolisthesis (grades 3 and 4) at L5-S1 or degenerative spondylolisthesis with objective evidence of neurologic impairment. These pedicle screw systems must comply with the following special controls:
(i) The design characteristics of the device, including engineering schematics, must ensure that the geometry and material composition are consistent with the intended use.
(ii) Non-clinical performance testing must demonstrate the mechanical function and durability of the implant.
(iii) Device components must be demonstrated to be biocompatible.
(iv) Validation testing must demonstrate the cleanliness and sterility of, or the ability to clean and sterilize, the device components and device-specific instruments.
(v) Labeling must include the following:
(A) A clear description of the technological features of the device including identification of device materials and the principles of device operation;
(B) Intended use and indications for use, including levels of fixation;
(C) Identification of magnetic resonance (MR) compatibility status;
(D) Cleaning and sterilization instructions for devices and instruments that are provided non-sterile to the end user; and
(E) Detailed instructions of each surgical step, including device removal.
(3) Class II (special controls), when a semi-rigid system is intended to provide immobilization and stabilization of spinal segments in the thoracic, lumbar, and sacral spine as an adjunct to fusion for any indication. In addition to complying with the special controls in paragraphs (b)(2)(i) through (v) of this section, these pedicle screw systems must comply with the following special controls:
(i) Demonstration that clinical performance characteristics of the device support the intended use of the product, including assessment of fusion compared to a clinically acceptable fusion rate.
(ii) Semi-rigid systems marketed prior to the effective date of this reclassification must submit an amendment to their previously cleared premarket notification (510(k)) demonstrating compliance with the special controls in paragraphs (b)(2)(i) through (v) and paragraph (b)(3)(i) of this section.