The RELIANCE CERVICAL IBF System is indicated for intervertebral body fusion of the spine in skeletally mature patients. The device systems are designed for use with autogenous bone graft to facilitate fusion. One device may be used per intervertebral space. The implants are intended to be used with legally cleared supplemental spinal fixation cleared for the implanted level.

The RELIANCE CERVICAL IBF System is intended for use at one level in the cervical spine, from C3 to TI, for treatment of cervical disc disease (defined at neck pain of discogenic origin with degeneration of the disc confirmed by history and radiographic studies). The RELIANCE CERVICAL IBF System is to be used in patients who have six weeks of non-operative treatment.

Device Description

The Reliance Cervical IBF System is comprised of implants and instrument components. The implant component, the Reliance Cervical IBF device, is a spacer, which inserts between vertebral bodies in the anterior column of the cervical spine. The spacer may be made of PEEK Optima LT1 with Tantalum markers. The Reliance Cervical IBF System may also include bone screws to secure the device to the vertebral body.

AI/ML Overview

The provided text is a 510(k) Summary for the Reliance Cervical IBF System, which is a medical device for intervertebral body fusion. The document focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence to already marketed predicate devices rather than providing detailed performance data from a clinical study with acceptance criteria.

Therefore, many of the requested categories for device performance and acceptance criteria are not applicable or not explicitly stated in this type of regulatory submission. This 510(k) summary primarily relies on mechanical testing and comparison of material, intended use, levels of attachment, size range, and use with supplemental fixation to predicate devices.

Here's the breakdown of the information that can be extracted and what cannot:

Acceptance Criteria and Study to Prove Device Meets Acceptance Criteria

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and the Reported Device Performance

Acceptance Criteria (Set by Regulation/Standard or Sponsor)	Reported Device Performance (from Study)
Mechanical Performance: - Compliant with ASTM F-2077 - Compliant with ASTM F-2267 - Compliant with ASTM Draft F-04.25.02.02	Mechanical Performance: - The Reliance Cervical IBF System was found to be substantially equivalent to the predicate devices with regard to mechanical performance, as demonstrated by testing per ASTM F-2077, ASTM F-2267, and ASTM Draft F-04.25.02.02.
Biocompatibility: - Substantially equivalent to predicate devices	Biocompatibility: - The Reliance Cervical IBF System is substantially equivalent to the predicate devices in terms of biocompatibility.
Sterilization: - Substantially equivalent to predicate devices	Sterilization: - The Reliance Cervical IBF System is substantially equivalent to the predicate devices in terms of sterilization.
Material Equivalence	The device is comprised of PEEK Optima LT1 with Tantalum markers, similar to predicate devices.
Intended Use Equivalence	The intended use is for intervertebral body fusion in the cervical spine (C3-T1) for cervical disc disease, consistent with predicate devices.
Levels of Attachment Equivalence	One device per intervertebral space, C3-T1, consistent with predicate devices.
Size Range Equivalence	Sizes are equivalent to predicate devices.
Use with Supplemental Fixation Equivalence	Intended for use with legally cleared supplemental spinal fixation, consistent with predicate devices.

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

Sample Size: Not applicable/Not specified for a clinical test set. The performance data discussed refers to mechanical testing. For mechanical testing, the "sample size" would refer to the number of devices or components tested, which is not provided.
Data Provenance: Not applicable for clinical data. The performance data is based on laboratory mechanical testing, not human data.

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

Not applicable. This document describes mechanical and material equivalence testing, not a clinical study requiring expert ground truth for interpretation of patient data.

4. Adjudication Method (e.g., 2+1, 3+1, none) for the Test Set

Not applicable. This is not a clinical study involving human readers or interpretation of clinical data.

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

No. An MRMC study was not conducted as this is a submission for a physical medical device (intervertebral body fusion system), not an AI/software device.

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

No. This is not an algorithm or AI device.

7. The type of ground truth used (expert consensus, pathology, outcomes data, etc.)

Not applicable. For mechanical testing, the "ground truth" would be the engineering specifications and performance limits defined by the ASTM standards, which the device's performance is compared against to demonstrate compliance/equivalence.

8. The Sample Size for the Training Set

Not applicable. This device is hardware, not an AI/software device that requires a training set.

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

Not applicable. No training set is used for this type of device.

Summary

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

510(k) Summary

23 Sep 2013

SEP 2 3 2013

Reliance Medical Systems, LLC 545 West 500 South, Suite 100 Bountiful, UT 84010 801-295-3280 Telephone: Fax: 801-294-0079

Bret M. Berry Contact: Member-Manager

510(k) Number: Common or Usual Name: Proposed Proprietary or Trade Name: Classification Name:

Regulation Number: Product Code:

K131429 Intervertebral Body Fusion Device Reliance Cervical IBF System Intervertebral Body Fusion Device. Spinal Intervertebral Body Fixation Orthosis 21 CFR 888.3080 OVE, ODP

Substantial Equivalence

The Reliance Cervical IBF is substantially equivalent to the legally marketed Reliance Cervical IBF (K120396), Biomet Solitaire-C System (K113796), the Synthes Zero-P System (K121852), Nuvasive Coroent Small Interlock System (K102547) and the Spinal Elements Mosaic (K122771). The Reliance Cervical IBF is equivalent to these commercially available devices in terms of material, intended use, levels of attachment, size range, and use with supplemental fixation.

Device Description

Intended Use/Indications for Use

The Reliance Cervical IBF System is indicated for intervertebral body fusion of the spine in skeletally mature patients. The device systems are designed for use with autogenous bone graft to facilitate fusion. One device may be used per intervertebral space. The implants are intended to be used with legally cleared supplemental spinal fixation cleared for the implanted level.

The Reliance Cervical IBF System is intended for use at one level in the cervical spine, from C3 to TI, for treatment of cervical disc disease (defined at neck pain of discogenic origin with degeneration of the disc confirmed by history and radiographic studies). The Reliance Cervical IBF System is to be used in patients who have six weeks of non-operative treatment.

Performance Data and Substantial Equivalence

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

Mechanical testing was performed on the Reliance Cervical IBF System following ASTM F-2077, ASTM F-2267, and ASTM Draft F-04.25.02.02. The Reliance Cervical IBF System was found to be substantially equivalent to the predicate devices. Additionally, the Reliance Cervical IBF System is substantially equivalent to the predicate devices in terms of sterilization and biocompatibility.

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

Image /page/2/Picture/0 description: The image shows the logo for the Department of Health & Human Services. The logo consists of a circular seal with the text "DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES USA" around the perimeter. Inside the circle is an abstract symbol resembling an eagle or bird with three curved lines representing its wings or body. The logo is black and white.

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES

Public Health Service

Food and Drug Administration 10903 New Hampshire Avenue Document Control Center - WO66-G609 Silver Spring, MD 20093-0002

Reliance Medical Systems, LLC Mr. Bret Berry Member-Manager 545 West 500 South Suite 100 Bountiful. Utah 84010

Re: K131429 Trade/Device Name: Reliance CERVICAL IBF System Regulation Number: 21 CFR 888.3080 Regulation Name: Intervertebral body fusion device Regulatory Class: Class II Product Code: OVE. ODP Dated: June 24, 2013 Received: June 25, 2013

Dear Mr. Berry:

We have reviewed your Scetion 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 10 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 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

September 23, 2013

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

Page 2 - Mr. Bret Berry

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 contact the Division of Small Manufacturers, International and Consumer Assistance at its tollfree number (800) 638-2041 or (301) 796-7100 or at its Internet address

http://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/ResourcesforYou/Industry/default.htm. 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/ReportalProblem/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/ResourcesforYou/Industry/default.htm.

Sincerely yours.

Mark N: Melkerson -S

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

Enclosure

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

Indications for Use

510(k) Number (if known): K131429

Device Name: Reliance CERVICAL IBF System

Indications for Use:

Prescription Use X (Part 21 CFR 801 Subpart D)

AND/OR

Over-The-Counter Use (21 CFR 801 Subpart C)

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

Concurrence of CDRH, Office of Device Evaluation (ODE)

Anton E. Dmitriev, PhD Division of Orthopedic Devices

Page of of _

Page 19 of 305

Regulation Number and Section

§ 888.3080 Intervertebral body fusion device.

(a)
Identification. An intervertebral body fusion device is an implanted single or multiple component spinal device made from a variety of materials, including titanium and polymers. The device is inserted into the intervertebral body space of the cervical or lumbosacral spine, and is intended for intervertebral body fusion.(b)
Classification. (1) Class II (special controls) for intervertebral body fusion devices that contain bone grafting material. The special control is the FDA guidance document entitled “Class II Special Controls Guidance Document: Intervertebral Body Fusion Device.” See § 888.1(e) for the availability of this guidance document.(2) Class III (premarket approval) for intervertebral body fusion devices that include any therapeutic biologic (e.g., bone morphogenic protein). Intervertebral body fusion devices that contain any therapeutic biologic require premarket approval.
(c)
Date premarket approval application (PMA) or notice of product development protocol (PDP) is required. Devices described in paragraph (b)(2) of this section shall have an approved PMA or a declared completed PDP in effect before being placed in commercial distribution.