(28 days)
The Augment Off-Axis Instrument System consists of specialized instruments intended to prepare anatomy prior to implantation of Comprehensive® Reverse Shoulder System components in reverse total shoulder arthroplasty procedures or Alliance® Augmented Glenoid System components in anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty procedures in accordance with their respective cleared indications for use and contraindications.
The instruments for this system are specifically indicated for use with the Comprehensive ® Reverse Shoulder System (K193373) or the Alliance® Augmented Glenoid System (K193180).
The Augment Off-Axis Instrument System consists of specialized instruments that are designed for preparation of anatomy prior to implantation of Comprehensive® Reverse Shoulder System or Alliance® Augmented Glenoid System components. The instruments in this system are intended to provide an alternate approach in ensuring proper preparation of the glenoid bone and tissue for receipt of a glenoid implant augment in reverse and anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty procedures.
A drop-in instrument tray contains the Augment Off-Axis reusable surgical instruments for secure and ergonomic storage, sterilization, and transportation between uses.
The provided document is a 510(k) premarket notification from the FDA, specifically concerning an orthopedic surgical instrument system called the "Augment Off-Axis Instrument System." It focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence to a predicate device for design modifications.
Crucially, this document does not contain any information about acceptance criteria or a study that proves the device meets those criteria, especially not in the context of an AI/human-in-the-loop diagnostic device performance study. The device described is a set of physical surgical instruments, not a diagnostic AI system.
Therefore, I cannot fulfill your request for information regarding AI/human-in-the-loop study criteria such as:
- A table of acceptance criteria and reported device performance
- Sample size used for the test set and data provenance
- Number of experts used to establish ground truth and their qualifications
- Adjudication method for the test set
- MRMC comparative effectiveness study results or effect size
- Standalone (algorithm-only) performance
- Type of ground truth used
- Sample size for the training set
- How ground truth for the training set was established
The document explicitly states under "Clinical Testing": "Clinical testing was not required as a basis for substantial equivalence." This further confirms that no such performance study, as you described, was conducted or reported in this submission.
The "Performance Data - Nonclinical" section mentions that the impact of modifications was evaluated via "analysis of the worst-case device," and "no further mechanical testing was performed" because the modification "did not introduce a new worst-case scenario." This refers to biomechanical or engineering performance of the physical instruments, not diagnostic accuracy of an algorithm.
§ 888.3660 Shoulder joint metal/polymer semi-constrained cemented prosthesis.
(a)
Identification. A shoulder joint metal/polymer semi-constrained cemented prosthesis is a device intended to be implanted to replace a shoulder joint. The device limits translation and rotation in one or more planes via the geometry of its articulating surfaces. It has no linkage across-the-joint. This generic type of device includes prostheses that have a humeral resurfacing component made of alloys, such as cobalt-chromium-molybdenum, and a glenoid resurfacing component made of ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene, and is limited to those prostheses intended for use with bone cement (§ 888.3027).(b)
Classification. Class II. The special controls for this device are:(1) FDA's:
(i) “Use of International Standard ISO 10993 ‘Biological Evaluation of Medical Devices—Part I: Evaluation and Testing,’ ”
(ii) “510(k) Sterility Review Guidance of 2/12/90 (K90-1),”
(iii) “Guidance Document for Testing Orthopedic Implants with Modified Metallic Surfaces Apposing Bone or Bone Cement,”
(iv) “Guidance Document for the Preparation of Premarket Notification (510(k)) Application for Orthopedic Devices,” and
(v) “Guidance Document for Testing Non-articulating, ‘Mechanically Locked’ Modular Implant Components,”
(2) International Organization for Standardization's (ISO):
(i) ISO 5832-3:1996 “Implants for Surgery—Metallic Materials—Part 3: Wrought Titanium 6-aluminum 4-vandium Alloy,”
(ii) ISO 5832-4:1996 “Implants for Surgery—Metallic Materials—Part 4: Cobalt-chromium-molybdenum casting alloy,”
(iii) ISO 5832-12:1996 “Implants for Surgery—Metallic Materials—Part 12: Wrought Cobalt-chromium-molybdenum alloy,”
(iv) ISO 5833:1992 “Implants for Surgery—Acrylic Resin Cements,”
(v) ISO 5834-2:1998 “Implants for Surgery—Ultra-high Molecular Weight Polyethylene—Part 2: Moulded Forms,”
(vi) ISO 6018:1987 “Orthopaedic Implants—General Requirements for Marking, Packaging, and Labeling,” and
(vii) ISO 9001:1994 “Quality Systems—Model for Quality Assurance in Design/Development, Production, Installation, and Servicing,” and
(3) American Society for Testing and Materials':
(i) F 75-92 “Specification for Cast Cobalt-28 Chromium-6 Molybdenum Alloy for Surgical Implant Material,”
(ii) F 648-98 “Specification for Ultra-High-Molecular-Weight Polyethylene Powder and Fabricated Form for Surgical Implants,”
(iii) F 799-96 “Specification for Cobalt-28 Chromium-6 Molybdenum Alloy Forgings for Surgical Implants,”
(iv) F 1044-95 “Test Method for Shear Testing of Porous Metal Coatings,”
(v) F 1108-97 “Specification for Titanium-6 Aluminum-4 Vanadium Alloy Castings for Surgical Implants,”
(vi) F 1147-95 “Test Method for Tension Testing of Porous Metal,”
(vii) F 1378-97 “Standard Specification for Shoulder Prosthesis,” and
(viii) F 1537-94 “Specification for Wrought Cobalt-28 Chromium-6 Molybdenum Alloy for Surgical Implants.”