(97 days)
The Camber Spine Technologies SPIRA Open Matrix LLIF is indicated for use in skeletally mature patients with Degenerative Disc Disease (DDD) at one or two contiguous levels from L2-S1. DDD is defined as discogenic back pain with degeneration of the disc confirmed by patient history and radiographic studies. Patients should have received 6 months of non-operative treatment prior to treatment with the devices. These DDD patients may also have up to Grade I spondylolisthesis or retrolisthesis at the involved level(s). The Camber Spine Technologies SPIRA Open Matrix LLIF is intended to be used with additional FDA-cleared supplementary fixation systems. The Camber Spine Technologies SPIRA Open Matrix LLIF system must be used with autogenous bone graft material.
The Camber Spine Technologies SPIRA Open Matrix LLIF is an Interbody Fusion Device that has spiral support arches to allow for a hollow chamber to permit packing with autogenous bone to facilitate fusion. The superior and inferior surfaces of the device have a roughened surface to help prevent movement of the device while fusion takes place.
The provided text describes a 510(k) premarket notification for a medical device called the "SPIRA Open Matrix LLIF," an intervertebral body fusion device. The document primarily focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence to previously marketed predicate devices rather than a study proving the device meets specific performance criteria for an AI/algorithm-driven device.
Therefore, the prompt's request for information related to AI/algorithm performance, such as sample sizes for test sets, expert ground truth establishment, MRMC studies, or standalone algorithm performance, cannot be answered based on the provided text. These elements are typically part of the regulatory review for diagnostic or AI-powered devices, not for an implantable device like the SPIRA Open Matrix LLIF, where the focus is on mechanical and material performance.
However, I can extract the information related to the device's mechanical performance testing as described in the document.
Here's an analysis based on the provided text, focusing on the mechanical acceptance criteria and study proving the device meets them:
1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance & Study Design:
The document states: "Testing performed indicate that the SPIRA Open Matrix LLIF is as mechanically sound as predicate devices. Testing included static compression, static compression-shear, dynamic compression, dynamic compression-shear, expulsion, and subsidence per ASTM F2077-14 and F2267-04. The results demonstrate that the acceptance criteria defined by predicate device performance were met."
While a table with exact numerical acceptance criteria is not explicitly provided, the criteria are implicitly defined by the performance of the predicate devices according to the specified ASTM standards. The study design involves testing the SPIRA Open Matrix LLIF against these standards to demonstrate equivalent mechanical performance to the predicates.
| Acceptance Criteria (Implied) | Reported Device Performance |
|---|---|
| Static Compression (per ASTM F2077-14) | Met acceptance criteria defined by predicate device performance |
| Static Compression-Shear (per ASTM F2077-14) | Met acceptance criteria defined by predicate device performance |
| Dynamic Compression (per ASTM F2077-14) | Met acceptance criteria defined by predicate device performance |
| Dynamic Compression-Shear (per ASTM F2077-14) | Met acceptance criteria defined by predicate device performance |
| Expulsion (per ASTM F2077-14) | Met acceptance criteria defined by predicate device performance |
| Subsidence (per ASTM F2267-04) | Met acceptance criteria defined by predicate device performance |
2. Sample Size Used for the Test Set and Data Provenance:
The document does not specify the sample size (e.g., number of devices tested) for the mechanical performance testing.
The data provenance is not explicitly mentioned as "country of origin," but given it's an FDA submission, the testing would typically be conducted in a laboratory accredited for such tests, likely in the US or a country with comparable standards. The nature of these tests (mechanical performance of an implant) makes them more akin to laboratory experiments than clinical data from patients (retrospective/prospective).
3. Number of Experts Used to Establish Ground Truth for the Test Set and Qualifications:
This question is not applicable to the type of safety and performance testing described. The "ground truth" for mechanical testing is established by the specified ASTM standards (F2077-14 and F2267-04) and the measured performance of predicate devices, not by human experts adjudicating medical images or clinical outcomes.
4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set:
This question is not applicable. Mechanical tests are objective measurements, not human interpretations requiring adjudication.
5. Multi-Reader Multi-Case (MRMC) Comparative Effectiveness Study:
This question is not applicable. An MRMC study is relevant for evaluating diagnostic accuracy or reader performance with AI assistance, not for the mechanical performance of an implantable device.
6. Standalone Performance (Algorithm Only without Human-in-the-Loop Performance):
This question is not applicable. The device is a physical intervertebral body fusion device, not an algorithm or AI-powered system.
7. The Type of Ground Truth Used:
The "ground truth" for the mechanical performance study is defined by:
- Established ASTM Standards: Specifically, ASTM F2077-14 ("Standard Test Methods for Intervertebral Body Fusion Devices") and ASTM F2267-04 ("Standard Test Method for Determining the Rate of Resorption of Porous Bioceramics for Surgical Implants and Bone Graft Substitutes").
- Performance of Predicate Devices: The new device's performance is compared against known characteristics and performance data of the identified predicate devices (SPIRA Open Matrix ALIF, 4WEB Medical LATERAL Spinal Truss System, Alphatec Spine Novel) to establish substantial equivalence.
8. The Sample Size for the Training Set:
This question is not applicable. There is no "training set" in the context of mechanical performance testing for an implantable medical device. This term is used for machine learning models.
9. How the Ground Truth for the Training Set Was Established:
This question is not applicable for the same reason as point 8.
{0}------------------------------------------------
Image /page/0/Picture/0 description: The image contains the logo of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). On the left is the Department of Health & Human Services logo. To the right of that is the FDA logo, which is a blue square with the letters "FDA" in white. To the right of the square is the text "U.S. FOOD & DRUG ADMINISTRATION" in blue.
Camber Spine Technologies LLC % Barry Sands Senior Regulatory/ Quality Consultant ROMIS, Inc. 110 Haverhill Road, Suite 526 Amesbury, Massachusetts 01913
Re: K180724
Trade/Device Name: SPIRA Open Matrix LLIF Regulation Number: 21 CFR 888.3080 Regulation Name: Intervertebral Body Fusion Device Regulatory Class: Class II Product Code: MAX Dated: June 12, 2018 Received: June 18, 2018
Dear Mr. Sands:
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 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
June 25, 2018
{1}------------------------------------------------
801); medical device 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.
Also, please note the regulation entitled, "Misbranding by reference to premarket notification" (21 CFR 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 comprehensive regulatory information about mediation-emitting products, including information about labeling regulations, please see Device Advice (https://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/DeviceRegulationandGuidance/) and CDRH Learn (http://www.fda.gov/Training/CDRHLearn). Additionally, you may contact the Division of Industry and Consumer Education (DICE) to ask a question about a specific regulatory topic. See the DICE website (http://www.fda.gov/DICE) for more information or contact DICE by email (DICE@fda.hhs.gov) or phone (1-800-638-2041 or 301-796-7100).
Sincerely,
Melissa Hall -S
For Mark N. Melkerson Director Division of Orthopedic Devices Office of Device Evaluation Center for Devices and Radiological Health
Enclosure
{2}------------------------------------------------
Indications for Use
510(k) Number (if known) K180724
Device Name SPIRA Open Matrix LLIF
Indications for Use (Describe)
The Camber Spine Technologies SPIRA Open Matrix LLIF is indicated for use in skeletally mature patients with Degenerative Disc Disease (DDD) at one or two contiguous levels from L2-S1. DDD is defined as discogenic back pain with degeneration of the disc confirmed by patient history and radiographic studies. Patients should have received 6 months of non-operative treatment prior to treatment with the devices. These DDD patients may also have up to Grade I spondylolisthesis or retrolisthesis at the involved level(s). The Camber Spine Technologies SPIRA Open Matrix LLF is intended to be used with additional FDA-cleared systems. The Camber Spine Technologies SPIRA Open Matrix LLIF system must be used with autogenous bone graft material.
| Type of Use (Select one or both, as applicable) | |
|---|---|
| ☑ Prescription Use (Part 21 CFR 801 Subpart D) | ☐ Over-The-Counter Use (21 CFR 801 Subpart C) |
CONTINUE ON A SEPARATE PAGE IF NEEDED.
This section applies only to requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.
DO NOT SEND YOUR COMPLETED FORM TO THE PRA STAFF EMAIL ADDRESS BELOW.
The burden time for this collection of information is estimated to average 79 hours per response, including the time to review instructions, search existing data sources, gather and maintain the data needed and complete and review the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this information collection, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to:
Department of Health and Human Services Food and Drug Administration Office of Chief Information Officer Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) Staff PRAStaff@fda.hhs.gov
"An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB number."
{3}------------------------------------------------
K180724 Page 1 of 2
510(k) Summary
| Device Trade Name: | SPIRA Open Matrix LLIF |
|---|---|
| Manufacturer: | Camber Spine Technologies418 E. Lancaster Ave.Wayne, PA 19087 |
| Contact: | Mr. Sean BishopProduct Development EngineerInstitute for Musculoskeletal Science and EducationPhone: (484) 420.4286 |
| Prepared by: | Barry SandsRQMIS. Inc.110 Haverhill Road, Suite 526Haverhill, MA 01913Phone: (978)-477-0206barrysands@rqmis.com |
| Date Prepared: | October 25, 2016 |
| Classifications: | 21 CFR §888.3080, Intervertebral body fusion device |
| Class: | II |
| Product Codes: | MAX |
| Primary Predicate: | SPIRA Open Matrix ALIF (K162986) |
| Additional Predicate(s): | 4WEB Medical LATERAL Spinal Truss System(K083894,K112316), Alphatec Spine Novel (K080699, K090782)and Camber Spine SPIRA Open Matrix ALIF (K162986) |
Indications For Use:
The Camber Spine Technologies SPIRA Open Matrix LLIF is indicated for use in skeletally mature patients with Degenerative Disc Disease (DDD) at one or two contiguous levels from L2-S1. DDD is defined as discogenic back pain with degeneration of the disc confirmed by patient history and radiographic studies. Patients should have received 6 months of non-operative treatment prior to treatment with the devices. These DDD patients may also have up to Grade I spondylolisthesis or retrolisthesis at the involved level(s). The Camber Spine Technologies SPIRA Open Matrix LLIF is intended to be used with additional FDA-cleared supplementary fixation systems. The Camber Spine Technologies SPIRA Open Matrix LLIF system must be used with autogenous bone graft material.
{4}------------------------------------------------
K180724 Page 1 of 2
Device Description:
The Camber Spine Technologies SPIRA Open Matrix LLIF is an Interbody Fusion Device that has spiral support arches to allow for a hollow chamber to permit packing with autogenous bone to facilitate fusion. The superior and inferior surfaces of the device have a roughened surface to help prevent movement of the device while fusion takes place.
Predicate Device:
The subject SPIRA Open Matrix LLIF device is substantially equivalent to predicates SPIRA Open Matrix ALIF (K162986), 4WEB Medical LATERAL Spinal Truss System (K083894, K112316), and the Alphatec Spine Novel (K080699, K090782) with respect to indications, design, materials, function, manufacturing, and/or performance.
Performance Testing Summary:
Testing performed indicate that the SPIRA Open Matrix LLIF is as mechanically sound as predicate devices. Testing included static compression, static compression-shear, dynamic compression, dynamic compression-shear, expulsion, and subsidence per ASTM F2077-14 and F2267-04. The results demonstrate that the acceptance criteria defined by predicate device performance were met.
Substantial Equivalence:
The subject SPIRA Open Matrix LLIF device was demonstrated to be substantially equivalent to predicates SPIRA Open Matrix ALIF (K162986), 4WEB Medical LATERAL Spinal Truss System (K083894, K112316), and the Alphatec Spine Novel (K080699, K090782) with respect to indications, design, materials, function, manufacturing, and/or performance.
Conclusion:
Camber Spine Technologies provided sufficient information to demonstrate the SPIRA Open Matrix LLIF is substantially equivalent to predicates SPIRA Open Matrix ALIF (K162986), 4WEB Medical LATERAL Spinal Truss System (K083894, K112316), and the Alphatec Spine Novel (K080699, K090782) with respect to indications, design, materials, function, manufacturing, and/or performance.
§ 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.