(71 days)
The UNiD™ Spine Analyzer is intended for assisting healthcare professionals in viewing and measuring images as well as planning orthopedic surgeries. The device allows surgeons and service providers to perform generic, as well as spine related measurements on images, and to plan surgical procedures. The device also includes tools for measuring anatomical components for placement of surgical implants. Clinical judgment and experience are required to properly use the software.
The UNiD™ Spine Analyzer is a web-based application developed to perform preoperative and postoperative patient image measurements and simulate preoperative planning steps for spine surgery. It aims to make measurements on a patient image, simulate a surgical strategy, draw patient-specific rods or choose from a pre-selection of standard implants. The UNiD™ Spine Analyzer allows the user to:
- Measure radiological images using generic tools and "specialty" tools
- Plan and simulate aspects of surgical procedures
- Estimate the compensatory effects of the simulated surgical procedure on the patient's spine
The planning of surgical procedures is done by Medtronic as part of the service of pre-operative planning. The surgical plan may then be used to assist in designing patient-specific implants. Surgeons will have to validate the surgical plan before Medtronic manufactures any implant.
The UNiD™ Spine Analyzer interface is accessible in either standalone mode or connected mode.
Here's a breakdown of the acceptance criteria and the study proving the device meets them, based on the provided FDA 510(k) clearance letter for the UNiD™ Spine Analyzer:
Overview of Device and Study Focus:
The UNiD™ Spine Analyzer is a web-based application designed to assist healthcare professionals in viewing, measuring, and planning orthopedic spine surgeries. This 510(k) submission primarily focuses on the update to the AI-enabled degenerative predictive model (Degenerative Predictive model). The study aims to demonstrate that this new version is non-inferior to the previous version (predicate device).
1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance
The core of the performance evaluation for this AI-enabled software function is focused on demonstrating non-inferiority of the updated "Degenerative Predictive model" to the predicate version.
| Acceptance Criteria | Reported Device Performance | Comments |
|---|---|---|
| AI-enabled Device Software Functions (AI-DSF): | This section specifically concerns the updated Degenerative Predictive model. The acceptance criterion is non-inferiority compared to the predicate device. | |
| Non-inferiority of the subject device (Degenerative Predictive model) vs. the predicate device (previous Degenerative Predictive model) using one-tailed paired T-tests for Non-Inferiority. | "The results from the degenerative predictive model performance testing met the defined acceptance criterion. The model showed non-inferiority compared to its predicate and is considered acceptable for use." | This statement confirms that the new AI model successfully met the pre-defined non-inferiority threshold. The specific metric for non-inferiority was based on "MAEs (Mean Absolute Errors) obtained with the subject device and the ones obtained with the predicate device." However, the exact MAE values or the non-inferiority margin are not specified in this document. The statistical parameters were an alpha of 0.025 and at least 90% power. This implies that the MAE of the subject device was not significantly worse than that of the predicate device. |
| Software Verification: (Adherence to design specifications) | Software verification was conducted on the UNiD™ Spine Analyzer in accordance with IEC 62304 through code review, unit testing, integration testing, and system-level integration. | A standard software development and quality assurance process. Details on specific test pass rates or metrics are not provided in this summary. |
| Software Validation: (Satisfaction of requirements & user needs) | Software validation was performed through user acceptance testing in accordance with IEC 82304-1. | A standard software quality assurance process. This ensures the software functions as intended for the user. Details on user acceptance test outcomes are not provided in this summary. |
| Cybersecurity Testing: (Integrity, confidentiality, availability) | Cybersecurity testing was conducted in accordance with ANSI AAMI SW96 and IEC 81001-5-1, including security risk assessment, threat modeling, vulnerability assessment, and penetration testing. | Standard cybersecurity validation to ensure data and system security. Specific findings or metrics are not provided. |
| Usability Evaluation: (Software ergonomics, safety & effectiveness) | Usability evaluation was conducted according to IEC 62366-1 to assess software ergonomics and ensure no significant risks. | Standard usability validation to ensure ease of use and minimize user-related errors. Specific findings are not provided. |
2. Sample Size Used for the Test Set and Data Provenance
- Test Set Sample Size: 274 patient surgery cases.
- Data Provenance:
- Country of Origin: US only.
- Retrospective/Prospective: The document states "Preoperative and post operative images from 1050 patient surgery cases were collected." This implies existing data, making it a retrospective collection.
3. Number of Experts Used to Establish the Ground Truth for the Test Set and Their Qualifications
- Number of Experts: Not explicitly stated as "experts." Instead, the document mentions "highly trained Medtronic measurement technicians."
- Qualifications of Experts: "Highly trained Medtronic measurement technicians, operating within a quality-controlled environment." The specific professional background (e.g., radiologist, orthopedist) or years of experience are not provided. They were responsible for vetting image viability and performing measurements.
4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set
The document does not explicitly describe an adjudication method (like 2+1 or 3+1 for consensus). It states that "After the images were collected, they were then provided to and measured by highly trained Medtronic measurement technicians, operating within a quality-controlled environment." This suggests a single evaluation per case by these technicians, which then forms the basis for the ground truth. There's no mention of multiple technicians independently measuring and then adjudicating discrepancies.
5. If a Multi-Reader Multi-Case (MRMC) Comparative Effectiveness Study Was Done
- No, a formal MRMC comparative effectiveness study involving human readers assisting with AI vs. without AI assistance was not mentioned or described in this document. The study specifically focused on the AI model's performance (algorithm only) compared to its previous version, not the impact on human reader performance.
6. If a Standalone (i.e., algorithm only without human-in-the-loop performance) Was Done
- Yes, a standalone (algorithm only) performance study was done. The entire "AI-enabled device software functions (AI-DSF)" section describes the evaluation of the new Degenerative Predictive model's output against the ground truth, comparing its performance (MAEs) directly to the predicate AI model. This evaluates the algorithm itself.
7. The Type of Ground Truth Used
- Derived from Measured Images by Technicians: "Ground truth was derived from the measured images." These measurements were performed by the "highly trained Medtronic measurement technicians." This is a form of expert consensus/review, albeit by technicians rather than clinicians, and described as measurements on images. It is not pathology or outcomes data.
8. The Sample Size for the Training Set
- Training Set Sample Size: 776 patient surgery cases.
9. How the Ground Truth for the Training Set Was Established
- The document implies the ground truth for the training set was established in the same manner as the test set: through measurements performed by "highly trained Medtronic measurement technicians." The statement "Ground truth was derived from the measured images" applies to the overall data collection process before splitting into training and testing sets.
FDA 510(k) Clearance Letter - UNiD™ Spine Analyzer
Page 1
U.S. Food & Drug Administration
10903 New Hampshire Avenue
Silver Spring, MD 20993
www.fda.gov
Doc ID # 04017.08.00
Medicrea International S.A.S. (Medtronic)
Cecile Humbert
Sr Regulatory Affairs Specialist
5389 Route de Strasbourg - Vancia
Rillieux-la-Pape, 69140
France
Re: K251629
Trade/Device Name: UNiD™ Spine Analyzer
Regulation Number: 21 CFR 892.2050
Regulation Name: Medical Image Management And Processing System
Regulatory Class: Class II
Product Code: QIH, LLZ
Dated: May 28, 2025
Received: May 28, 2025
Dear Cecile Humbert:
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 (the 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 available 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.
Additional information about changes that may require a new premarket notification are provided in the FDA guidance documents entitled "Deciding When to Submit a 510(k) for a Change to an Existing Device"
August 7, 2025
Medicrea International S.A.S. (Medtronic)
Cecile Humbert
Sr Regulatory Affairs Specialist
5389 Route de Strasbourg - Vancia
Rillieux-la-Pape, 69140
France
August 7, 2025
Re: K251629
Trade/Device Name: UNiD™ Spine Analyzer
Regulation Number: 21 CFR 892.2050
Regulation Name: Medical Image Management And Processing System
Regulatory Class: Class II
Product Code: QIH, LLZ
Dated: May 28, 2025
Received: May 28, 2025
Dear Cecile Humbert:
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 (the 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 available 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.
Additional information about changes that may require a new premarket notification are provided in the FDA guidance documents entitled "Deciding When to Submit a 510(k) for a Change to an Existing Device"
U.S. Food & Drug Administration
10903 New Hampshire Avenue
Silver Spring, MD 20993
www.fda.gov
Page 2
K251629 - Cecile Humbert Page 2
(https://www.fda.gov/media/99812/download) and "Deciding When to Submit a 510(k) for a Software Change to an Existing Device" (https://www.fda.gov/media/99785/download).
Your device is also subject to, among other requirements, the Quality System (QS) regulation (21 CFR Part 820), which includes, but is not limited to, 21 CFR 820.30, Design controls; 21 CFR 820.90, Nonconforming product; and 21 CFR 820.100, Corrective and preventive action. Please note that regardless of whether a change requires premarket review, the QS regulation requires device manufacturers to review and approve changes to device design and production (21 CFR 820.30 and 21 CFR 820.70) and document changes and approvals in the device master record (21 CFR 820.181).
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 device-related adverse events) (21 CFR Part 803) for devices or postmarketing safety reporting (21 CFR Part 4, Subpart B) for combination products (see https://www.fda.gov/combination-products/guidance-regulatory-information/postmarketing-safety-reporting-combination-products); good manufacturing practice requirements as set forth in the quality systems (QS) regulation (21 CFR Part 820) for devices or current good manufacturing practices (21 CFR Part 4, Subpart A) for combination products; and, if applicable, the electronic product radiation control provisions (Sections 531-542 of the Act); 21 CFR Parts 1000-1050.
All medical devices, including Class I and unclassified devices and combination product device constituent parts are required to be in compliance with the final Unique Device Identification System rule ("UDI Rule"). The UDI Rule requires, among other things, that a device bear a unique device identifier (UDI) on its label and package (21 CFR 801.20(a)) unless an exception or alternative applies (21 CFR 801.20(b)) and that the dates on the device label be formatted in accordance with 21 CFR 801.18. The UDI Rule (21 CFR 830.300(a) and 830.320(b)) also requires that certain information be submitted to the Global Unique Device Identification Database (GUDID) (21 CFR Part 830 Subpart E). For additional information on these requirements, please see the UDI System webpage at https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/device-advice-comprehensive-regulatory-assistance/unique-device-identification-system-udi-system.
Also, please note the regulation entitled, "Misbranding by reference to premarket notification" (21 CFR 807.97). For questions regarding the reporting of adverse events under the MDR regulation (21 CFR Part 803), please go to https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/medical-device-safety/medical-device-reporting-mdr-how-report-medical-device-problems.
For comprehensive regulatory information about medical devices and radiation-emitting products, including information about labeling regulations, please see Device Advice (https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/device-advice-comprehensive-regulatory-assistance) and CDRH Learn (https://www.fda.gov/training-and-continuing-education/cdrh-learn). 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 (https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/device-advice-comprehensive-regulatory-
Page 3
K251629 - Cecile Humbert Page 3
assistance/contact-us-division-industry-and-consumer-education-dice) for more information or contact DICE by email (DICE@fda.hhs.gov) or phone (1-800-638-2041 or 301-796-7100).
Sincerely,
Jessica Lamb, PhD
Assistant Director
Imaging Software Team
DHT8B: Division of Radiological Imaging
Devices and Electronic Products
OHT8: Office of Radiological Health
Office of Product Evaluation and Quality
Center for Devices and Radiological Health
Enclosure
Page 4
Indications for Use
Please type in the marketing application/submission number, if it is known. This textbox will be left blank for original applications/submissions. K251629
Please provide the device trade name(s). UNiD™ Spine Analyzer
Please provide your Indications for Use below.
The UNiD™ Spine Analyzer is intended for assisting healthcare professionals in viewing and measuring images as well as planning orthopedic surgeries. The device allows surgeons and service providers to perform generic, as well as spine related measurements on images, and to plan surgical procedures. The device also includes tools for measuring anatomical components for placement of surgical implants. Clinical judgment and experience are required to properly use the software.
Please select the types of uses (select one or both, as applicable).
☑ Prescription Use (Part 21 CFR 801 Subpart D)
☐ Over-The-Counter Use (21 CFR 801 Subpart C)
UNiD™ Spine Analyzer Page 9 of 32
Page 5
510(k) Summary
UNiD™ Spine Analyzer
Date prepared: May 28, 2025
I. Submitter information
| Submitter | MEDICREA INTERNATIONAL S.A.S. (MEDTRONIC) |
|---|---|
| 5389 Route de Strasbourg – Vancia | |
| Rillieux-la-Pape, 69140 | |
| France | |
| Phone : 00 33 4 72 01 87 87 |
| Contact Person | Cécile HUMBERT |
|---|---|
| Sr Regulatory Affairs Specialist | |
| MEDICREA INTERNATIONAL S.A.S. (MEDTRONIC) |
II. Device identification
| Trade name | UNiD™ Spine Analyzer |
|---|---|
| Classification Regulation | |
| Common Name | Automated radiological image processing software |
| Primary Product Code | QIH |
| Associated Product Code | LLZ |
| Regulation Number | 21 CFR 892.2050 |
| Regulation Name | Medical image management and processing system |
| Class | 2 |
III. Predicate and reference devices
| Primary predicate device | |
|---|---|
| Device name | UNiD™ Spine Analyzer |
| 510(k) information | K212005, cleared on 01/12/2022 |
| Common Name | system, image processing, radiological |
| Product Code | LLZ |
| Regulation Number | 21 CFR 892.2050 |
| Regulation Name | Medical image management and processing system |
| Class | 2 |
IV. Subject device description
The UNiD™ Spine Analyzer is a web-based application developed to perform preoperative and postoperative patient image measurements and simulate preoperative planning steps for spine surgery. It aims to make measurements on a patient image, simulate a surgical strategy, draw patient-specific rods or choose from a pre-selection of standard implants. The UNiD™ Spine Analyzer allows the user to:
- Measure radiological images using generic tools and "specialty" tools
- Plan and simulate aspects of surgical procedures
- Estimate the compensatory effects of the simulated surgical procedure on the patient's spine
The planning of surgical procedures is done by Medtronic as part of the service of pre-operative planning. The surgical plan may then be used to assist in designing patient-specific implants. Surgeons will have to validate the surgical plan before Medtronic manufactures any implant.
The UNiD™ Spine Analyzer interface is accessible in either standalone mode or connected mode.
Page 6
V. Intended use and indications for use
| Intended use / Indications for use | The UNiD™ Spine Analyzer is intended for assisting healthcare professionals in viewing and measuring images as well as planning orthopedic surgeries. The device allows surgeons and service providers to perform generic, as well as spine related measurements on images, and to plan surgical procedures. The device also includes tools for measuring anatomical components for placement of surgical implants. Clinical judgment and experience are required to properly use the software. |
|---|
VI. Comparison of technological characteristics
The subject device has similar fundamental scientific technology, overall design, features, computer configuration characteristics, intended use, and indications as the predicate device. The subject device and the predicate device are intended to assisting healthcare professionals in viewing and measuring images as well as planning orthopedic surgeries.
The subject device and the predicate device are compared in the table below.
| Feature/ Attribute | Subject Device UNiD™ Spine Analyzer 5.0.0 | Predicate UNiD™ Spine Analyzer 4.0.0 |
|---|---|---|
| Product code(s) | QIH, LLZ | LLZ |
| Regulation number | 892.2050 | 892.2050 |
| Classification | 2 | 2 |
| Intended use / Indications for use | The UNiD™ Spine Analyzer is intended for assisting healthcare professionals in viewing and measuring images as well as planning orthopedic surgeries. The device allows surgeons and service providers to perform generic, as well as spine related measurements on images, and to plan surgical procedures. The device also includes tools for measuring anatomical components for placement of surgical implants. Clinical judgment and experience are required to properly use the software. | The UNiD™ Spine Analyzer is intended for assisting healthcare professionals in viewing and measuring images as well as planning orthopedic surgeries. The device allows surgeons and service providers to perform generic, as well as spine related measurements on images, and to plan surgical procedures. The device also includes tools for measuring anatomical components for placement of surgical implants. Clinical judgment and experience are required to properly use the software. |
| Fundamental scientific technology | Standalone software | Standalone software |
| Computer | PC Compatible | PC Compatible |
| Operating System | Windows + Mac | Windows + Mac |
| Supply mean | Cloud-based | Cloud-based |
| Health Data Host | AWS | AWS |
| Frontend code | Angular 14 & Angular JS 1.7 | Angular JS 1.7 |
| Backend code | .NET 8.0 | .NET 4.8 |
| Databases server | SQL Server | MySQL |
| Human intervention | Required for interpretation and manipulation of images | Required for interpretation and manipulation of images |
| Supported image format | JPEG; PNG; GIF | JPEG; PNG; GIF |
| Access mode | Standalone or connected mode | Standalone or connected mode |
| Feature - Image setting | Contains all image setting tools (contrast; brightness; zoom in/out; flip, rotate, text overlay, calibration) Intermodal calibration has been removed as part of a bug fix. | Contains all image setting tools (contrast; brightness; zoom in/out; flip, rotate, text overlay, calibration; intermodal calibration) |
Page 7
| Feature - Generic measurements tools | Contains all generic measurements tools (Line; circle; angle; measured, simulated, and normative values display; values color-coding) Color-coding thresholds are reworked but the operating mode is similar. | Contains all generic measurements tools (Line; circle; angle; measured, simulated, and normative values display; values color-coding) |
|---|---|---|
| Feature - Spine measurements tools | Contains all spine-related measurements tools (Llordo; TKypho; pelvic; T1SPi; SVA; SA Analysis; Sagittal wizard; Coronal wizard; Transitional anatomy (as part of Sagittal wizard); Cervical; Lenke classification; Coronal correction factor) Sagittal Wizard, SA Analysis, Cervical tool and Lenke tool are reworked for improvement and adding new calculations, but the operating mode remains similar. The Guide Spline tool has been removed as part of a bug fix. | Contains all spine-related measurements tools (Llordo; TKypho; pelvic; T1SPi; SVA; SA Analysis; Sagittal wizard; Coronal wizard; Transitional anatomy (as part of Sagittal wizard); Cervical; Lenke classification; Guide spline; Coronal correction factor) |
| Feature - Surgical tools | Contains surgical tools to simulate surgical gestures (wedge; open; resect; spondy; wedge auto; open auto; resect auto) | Contains surgical tools to simulate surgical gestures (wedge; open; resect; spondy, wedge auto; open auto; resect auto) |
| Feature - Implants tools | Contains tools to place or draw rods, screws or cages (Free Rod; cage; screw; screw selection; Rod Auto; cage auto; screw wizard; postop screw). Some tools are reworked and relabeled. Tool functionalities have been improved, and bugs have been fixed, but there is no change in output data of the reworked tools. | Contains generic implants and tools to place and/or draw rods, screws or cages (UNiD Rod; cage; cage selection; screw; screw selection; UNiD Rod Auto; cage auto; screw wizard; postop screw). |
| Feature - Implants database | Contains commercially available interbody devices. Some TLIF and ALIF implants have been removed from the database. | Contains commercially available interbody devices. |
| Feature - AI algorithms | Degenerative; Adult Deformity; Pediatric Deformity The Degenerative model is updated. The functionality is similar. A new application is added (LIV=L5) | Degenerative; Adult Deformity; Pediatric Deformity |
| Features - UNiD™ plan export | Contains several export options (as image, as ZIP file or to the Medtronic HUB). The export options to the Medtronic HUB are reworked (export default view with transitional anatomy; link a rod design to a rod order) | Contains several export options (as image, as ZIP file or to the Medtronic HUB). |
Table 1: Substantial Equivalence Comparison
Page 8
VII. Performance data
| Nonclinical tests | The following non-clinical performance data were provided in support of substantial equivalence: |
|---|
Software verification
The software verification is a combination of software code review, software unit test, unit integration testing, and system level integration to ensure the software is developed correctly and adheres to its design specifications. Software verification was conducted on the UNiD™ Spine Analyzer in accordance with IEC 62304.
Software validation
The software validation was performed through user acceptance testing to ensure the software satisfies the specified requirements and meets the user's needs. It was conducted on the UNiD™ Spine Analyzer in accordance with IEC 82304-1.
AI-enabled device software functions (AI-DSF)
The software incorporates AI-DSF, which give indication to the user about compensatory mechanisms the patient could experience after the surgery according to the planned instrumentation. Depending on the type of surgery (Adult, Pediatric or Degenerative), a specific predictive model is available.
Outputs of these models are intended to be used as inputs of the software system to simulate compensatory mechanisms after spinal fixation.
The subject device incorporates a new version of the Degenerative Predictive model compared to the predicate device. This new version includes degenerative constructs with Lower Instrumented level on L5 and predicts Lower non instrumented lordosis in these situations.
Preoperative and post operative images from 1050 patient surgery cases were collected from different clinical sites in the US only.
After the images were collected, they were then provided to and measured by highly trained Medtronic measurement technicians, operating within a quality-controlled environment. The viability of images for use is vetted by these technicians before beginning surgical planning. Consequently, the manufacturer of imaging equipment does not have any impact on performance.
Ground truth was derived from the measured images.
Each patient case was assigned a unique identifier and included only in either the testing or the training dataset, in order to ensure the independence of both datasets.
The demographic characteristics for the global dataset are presented in the table below.
| Degen model | Training set (No. of subjects=776) | Testing set (No. of subjects=274) | Overall (No. of subjects=1050) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mean age, years (sd) | 62.4 (11.5) | 61.0 (12.7) | 62.0 (11.8) |
| Gender, N (%) | |||
| Female | 389 (50%) | 127 (46%) | 516 (49%) |
| Male | 387 (50%) | 147 (54%) | 534 (51%) |
Table 2: Degenerative Model Demographics global dataset
Non-inferiority of the subject device vs the predicate device was evaluated: one-tailed paired T-tests for non-inferiority were performed between the MAEs obtained with the subject
Page 9
device and the ones obtained with the predicate device. The acceptance criterion for these statistical tests were set to alpha of 0.025, and at least 90% power.
The results from the degenerative predictive model performance testing met the defined acceptance criterion. The model showed non-inferiority compared to its predicate and is considered acceptable for use.
Cybersecurity testing
The cybersecurity testing was conducted on the UNiD™ Spine Analyzer in accordance with ANSI AAMI SW96 and IEC 81001-5-1 to ensure the software integrity, confidentiality and availability. Activities performed as part of cybersecurity testing included: security risk assessment and threat modeling, vulnerability assessment, and penetration testing.
Usability evaluation
Usability of the UNiD™ Spine Analyzer user interface was evaluated according to IEC 62366-1. The purpose was to assess the software ergonomics and ensure no usability issues could raise significant risks in terms of safety and effectiveness.
| Clinical tests | No clinical testing was used in order to support this submission. |
|---|
VIII. Conclusion
Based on the information contained in this submission, the subject UNiD™ Spine Analyzer v5.0.0 device is substantially equivalent to the following predicate device:
- Predicate 1 (Primary Predicate): UNiD™ Spine Analyzer v4.0.0 (K212005, S.E. 01/12/2022)
§ 892.2050 Medical image management and processing system.
(a)
Identification. A medical image management and processing system is a device that provides one or more capabilities relating to the review and digital processing of medical images for the purposes of interpretation by a trained practitioner of disease detection, diagnosis, or patient management. The software components may provide advanced or complex image processing functions for image manipulation, enhancement, or quantification that are intended for use in the interpretation and analysis of medical images. Advanced image manipulation functions may include image segmentation, multimodality image registration, or 3D visualization. Complex quantitative functions may include semi-automated measurements or time-series measurements.(b)
Classification. Class II (special controls; voluntary standards—Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine (DICOM) Std., Joint Photographic Experts Group (JPEG) Std., Society of Motion Picture and Television Engineers (SMPTE) Test Pattern).