(32 days)
The EVOS Small Fragment Plating System is indicated for adult and pediatric patients with osteopenic bone. It is indicated for fixation of small and long bone fractures, including, but not limited to, those of the tibia, fibula, femur, humerus, ulna, radius, pelvis, acetabulum, metacarpals, metatarsals, and clavicle.
Subject of this premarket notification are line additions to the EVOS Small Fragment Upper Extremity Plating System. The line additions are design modifications of existing plates cleared in K173293 and include changes to the shape and number of holes of the subject plates. When compared against the existing EVOS Small Fragment Plates already cleared for market, the subject plates use the same hole features and are designed to work with the same bone screws.
The subject EVOS Small Fragment Upper Extremity plates are intended to be used with existing Smith & Nephew implants and instruments that have been previously cleared for market for use with the EVOS Small Fragment Plating System.
This is a 510(k) premarket notification for a medical device, specifically EVOS Small Fragment Upper Extremity Plates Line Additions. This type of submission generally focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence to a legally marketed predicate device, rather than proving efficacy or a specific level of performance through a clinical study with detailed acceptance criteria and expert reviews in the same way an AI/ML device might.
Therefore, the requested information regarding acceptance criteria, study details, expert qualifications, adjudication, MRMC studies, standalone performance, and ground truth for training/testing sets is not applicable to this type of submission. The FDA 510(k) process for this device relies on pre-clinical mechanical testing and comparison to a predicate device to establish substantial equivalence.
Here's how to interpret the provided document in the context of your request:
1. A table of acceptance criteria and the reported device performance
- Acceptance Criteria: For this type of orthopedic implant modification, the "acceptance criteria" are implied by demonstrating substantial equivalence to the predicate device. This typically involves showing that the new device performs at least as well as, or equivalently to, the predicate device in relevant mechanical tests, and that the modifications do not introduce new safety or effectiveness concerns. The criterion is that the "minor modifications to the shape of the plate and number of holes are not expected to impact device safety or effectiveness."
- Reported Device Performance:
- Financial element analysis (FEA) was conducted to "evaluate the peak stress of potential design modifications to the subject plates." While no specific numerical performance metrics or thresholds are provided in this summary, the conclusion states that the "device comparisons described in this premarket notification demonstrated that the proposed devices are substantially equivalent to legally marketed predicates with respect to intended use, indications, and performance characteristics."
2. Sample sized used for the test set and the data provenance (e.g. country of origin of the data, retrospective or prospective)
- N/A. No human or animal test subjects were used. The testing was pre-clinical (FEA on plate designs).
3. Number of experts used to establish the ground truth for the test set and the qualifications of those experts (e.g. radiologist with 10 years of experience)
- N/A. No expert ground truth establishment for a test set is mentioned, as this was a pre-clinical, mechanical assessment of device modifications.
4. Adjudication method (e.g. 2+1, 3+1, none) for the test set
- N/A. Not applicable, as there was no test set requiring expert adjudication.
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
- N/A. This device is a passive orthopedic implant, not an AI-assisted diagnostic tool.
6. If a standalone (i.e. algorithm only without human-in-the-loop performance) was done
- N/A. This device is a passive orthopedic implant, not an algorithm.
7. The type of ground truth used (expert consensus, pathology, outcomes data, etc)
- The "ground truth" here is implied by mechanical engineering principles and analysis (Finite Element Analysis) for stress distribution, which is compared to the expectations based on the predicate device.
8. The sample size for the training set
- N/A. There is no "training set" in the context of an orthopedic implant modification. FEA involves modeling the device, not training a machine learning algorithm.
9. How the ground truth for the training set was established
- N/A. Not applicable, as there is no training set mentioned or implied.
In summary, this 510(k) submission relies on pre-clinical mechanical testing (Finite Element Analysis) to demonstrate substantial equivalence of minor design modifications to an existing orthopedic implant line. The framework for evaluating AI/ML devices with clinical studies, expert consensus, and ground truth establishment does not apply here.
{0}------------------------------------------------
March 11, 2019
Image /page/0/Picture/1 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 blue square is the text "U.S. FOOD & DRUG ADMINISTRATION" in blue.
Smith & Nephew, Inc. Shereen Bienz Senior Regulatory Affairs Specialist 1450 Brooks Road Memphis, Tennessee 38116
Re: K190253
Trade/Device Name: EVOS Small Fragment Upper Extremity Plates Line Additions Regulation Number: 21 CFR 888.3030 Regulation Name: Single/Multiple Component Metallic Bone Fixation Appliances And Accessories Regulatory Class: Class II Product Code: HRS Dated: February 6, 2019 Received: February 7, 2019
Dear Shereen Bienz:
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. Although this letter refers to your product as a device, please be aware that some cleared products may instead be combination products. The 510(k) Premarket Notification Database located at https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfpmn/pmn.cfm identifies combination product submissions. 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
{1}------------------------------------------------
801); medical device reporting of medical device-related adverse events) (21 CFR 803) for devices or postmarketing safety reporting (21 CFR 4, Subpart B) for combination products (see https://www.fda.gov/CombinationProducts/GuidanceRegulatoryInformation/ucm597488.htm); good manufacturing practice requirements as set forth in the quality systems (OS) regulation (21 CFR Part 820) for devices or current good manufacturing practices (21 CFR 4, Subpart A) for combination products; 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,
Shumaya Ali -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) K190253
Device Name
EVOS Small Fragment Upper Extremity Plates Line Additions
Indications for Use (Describe)
The EVOS Small Fragment Plating System is indicated for adult and pediatric patients with osteopenic bone. It is indicated for fixation of small and long bone fractures, including, but not limited to, those of the tibia, fibula, femur, humerus, ulna, radius, pelvis, acetabulum, metacarpals, metatarsals, and clavicle.
Type of Use (Select one or both, as applicable)
X 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."
Form Approved: OMB No. 0910-0120 Expiration Date: 06/30/2020 See PRA Statement below.
{3}------------------------------------------------
le are smith&nephew
| Submitted by: | Smith & Nephew, Inc.Orthopaedic Division1450 East Brooks RoadMemphis, Tennessee 38116 |
|---|---|
| Date of Summary: | February 6, 2019 |
| Name of Device: | EVOS Small Fragment Upper Extremity Plates Line Additions |
| Common Name: | Bone Plates |
| Device Classification Name andReference: | 21 CFR 888.3030 Single/multiple component metallic bonefixation appliances and accessories |
| Device Class: | Class II |
| Panel Code: | Orthopaedics/87 |
| Product Code: | HRS |
Predicates
| Manufacturer | Description | SubmissionNumber | Clearance Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| Smith & Nephew, Inc. | Smith & Nephew EVOS SmallFragment Upper Extremity Plates | K173293 | January 8, 2018 |
Device Description
Subject of this premarket notification are line additions to the EVOS Small Fragment Upper Extremity Plating System. The line additions are design modifications of existing plates cleared in K173293 and include changes to the shape and number of holes of the subject plates. When compared against the existing EVOS Small Fragment Plates already cleared for market, the subject plates use the same hole features and are designed to work with the same bone screws.
The subject EVOS Small Fragment Upper Extremity plates are intended to be used with existing Smith & Nephew implants and instruments that have been previously cleared for market for use with the EVOS Small Fragment Plating System.
Indications for Use
The EVOS Small Fragment Plating System is indicated for adult and pediatric patients, as well as patients with osteopenic bone. It is indicated for fixation of small and long bone fractures, including, but not limited to, those of the tibia, fibula, femur, humerus, ulna, radius, pelvis, acetabulum, metacarpals, metatarsals, and clavicle.
{4}------------------------------------------------
Technological Characteristics
The subject devices are similar to existing Smith & Nephew Upper Extremity plates cleared in K173293. The minor modifications to the shape of the plate and number of holes are not expected to impact device safety or effectiveness, as demonstrated through mechanical testing. Device comparisons described in this premarket notification demonstrated that the proposed devices are substantially equivalent to legally marketed predicates with respect to intended use, indications, and performance characteristics.
Summary of Pre-Clinical Testing
- . Finite element analysis (FEA) was conducted on the proposed plate designs to evaluate the peak stress of potential design modifications to the subject plates
Conclusion
This Special 510(k) premarket notification is being submitted to request clearance for the EVOS Small Fragment Plating System Upper Extremity Plates modifications. Based on similarities to the predicate plating systems and a review of the mechanical testing performed, the subject devices are substantially equivalent to the predicate devices.
§ 888.3030 Single/multiple component metallic bone fixation appliances and accessories.
(a)
Identification. Single/multiple component metallic bone fixation appliances and accessories are devices intended to be implanted consisting of one or more metallic components and their metallic fasteners. The devices contain a plate, a nail/plate combination, or a blade/plate combination that are made of alloys, such as cobalt-chromium-molybdenum, stainless steel, and titanium, that are intended to be held in position with fasteners, such as screws and nails, or bolts, nuts, and washers. These devices are used for fixation of fractures of the proximal or distal end of long bones, such as intracapsular, intertrochanteric, intercervical, supracondylar, or condylar fractures of the femur; for fusion of a joint; or for surgical procedures that involve cutting a bone. The devices may be implanted or attached through the skin so that a pulling force (traction) may be applied to the skeletal system.(b)
Classification. Class II.