Search Results

Fiber Disks and Blocks (TRINIA) are milling blanks composed of a multi-directional interlacing of fiberglass and resin in several layers. They are intended to be used solely by dental technicians and dentists for making copings, substructures, or frameworks for permanent and transitional anterior or posterior crowns, and substructures that can be for either cemented or uncemented restorations (e.g. telescopic restorations).

Fiber Disks and Blocks (TRINIA) are milling blanks composed of a multi-directional interlacing of fiberglass and resin in several layers.

I am sorry, but the provided text does not contain the information required to answer your request. The document is an FDA 510(k) clearance letter for a dental device (Fiber Disks and Blocks (TRINIA)), which primarily focuses on regulatory approval based on substantial equivalence to a predicate device. It does not include details about specific acceptance criteria for performance, a study to prove meeting those criteria, sample sizes, expert qualifications, adjudication methods, MRMC studies, standalone performance, or ground truth establishment.

Ask a specific question about this device

Fiber Disks and Blocks (TRINIA) are milling blanks composed of a multi-directional interlacing of fiberglass and resin in several layers. They are intended to be used solely by dental technicians and dentists for making copings, substructures, removable dentures, or frameworks for permanent and transitional anterior or posterior crowns, bridgework, and substructures that can be for either cemented or uncemented restorations (e.g. telescopic restorations).

TRINIA is a fiber machining disk block. It is made of layers of glass fibers kept together by epoxy resin. TRINIA products are designed for the manufacturing of non-metallic dental appliances. The dental appliance is machined either by a CAD/CAM machine or by using the copying technique. TRINIA already possesses the mechanical characteristics needed for producing these dental appliances; no curing is necessary at the dental lab to make the product function properly.

Here's an analysis of the provided text regarding the acceptance criteria and study for the TRINIA dental device:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance:

The document establishes acceptance criteria by demonstrating that TRINIA's physical properties and biocompatibility are comparable to or exceed those of the predicate device. For some tests, direct comparison to the predicate is available, while for others, the "acceptance criteria" can be inferred to be the reported result itself, as these values demonstrate the device's inherent mechanical and biological characteristics, which are deemed acceptable.

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

The document does not explicitly state the sample sizes used for each physical property test. It mentions that "Testing has been performed to the standards listed in the 'Description of the performance aspects' section." These standards (e.g., ISO 14125, ASTM D3039) typically prescribe specific sample sizes for their respective tests. Without direct access to the full test reports, the exact sample sizes are not known from this summary.

The data provenance is not explicitly stated in terms of country of origin but is implied to be from internal testing conducted by Bicon, LLC (USA-based company). The testing is retrospective, presenting results of already completed tests.

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

This information is not applicable to this type of device and study. The "ground truth" for material properties is established by the standardized testing methods themselves, which produce objective, measurable results, not by expert consensus or interpretation in the same way clinical diagnostic studies do.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set:

This is not applicable. As the testing involves objective measurement of physical and chemical properties according to established standards, there is no need for an adjudication method by experts.

5. Multi-Reader Multi-Case (MRMC) Comparative Effectiveness Study:

No, an MRMC comparative effectiveness study was not done. This type of study is relevant for diagnostic imaging or interpretation tasks where human readers' performance is being evaluated and compared, often with and without AI assistance. This device is a dental material, not a diagnostic tool requiring human interpretation.

6. Standalone (Algorithm Only) Performance:

No, a standalone (algorithm only) performance study was not done. This concept is also not applicable to a physical dental material. The "performance" here refers to the material's physical and biological properties, not an algorithm's output.

7. Type of Ground Truth Used:

The "ground truth" for this device's evaluation is primarily based on objective, quantitative measurements obtained via recognized international and national standards (ISO, ASTM) for physical properties and biocompatibility testing criteria (ISO 10993 series). The values obtained from these tests serve as the "ground truth" against which the device's performance is assessed.

8. Sample Size for the Training Set:

This information is not applicable. This is a physical material, not an AI/ML algorithm that requires a "training set" in the conventional sense. The "development" or "design" of the material might involve experimentation and iteration, but this is distinct from an algorithm training process.

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

This information is not applicable for the same reasons as point 8.

Ask a specific question about this device

The 3.0 mm Bicon implants are designed for use in edentulous sites in the mandible or maxilla for support of a complete denture prosthesis, a terminal or intermediate abutment for fixed bridgework, support of the res, or as a single tooth replacement. The device may be used equally well in a single-stage or two-stage surgical procedure. It is indicated for immediate implantation in extraction sites or implantation in partially healed or completely healed alveolar ridge situations. When a one-stage implantationoroach is applied, the implant may be immediately loaded when good primary stability is achieved and the functional load is appropriate. The 3.0 Bicon implants shall be used only to replace maxillary lateral incisors and mandibular lateral and central incisors.

Not Found

The provided document is a 510(k) premarket notification letter from the FDA regarding a dental implant (3.0 x 8.0mm and 3.0 x 11mm Bicon Implant). It focuses on regulatory approval based on substantial equivalence to predicate devices.

This document does NOT contain information about acceptance criteria, device performance studies, sample sizes, expert qualifications, adjudication methods, MRMC studies, standalone performance, or ground truth establishment for a medical device AI/software.

The request asks for specific details about a study proving a device meets acceptance criteria, but these details are not present in the provided FDA letter. The letter is a regulatory approval notice, not a study report.

Therefore, I cannot fulfill the request using the provided text.

Ask a specific question about this device

The Bicon implant is designed for use in edentulous sites in the mandible or maxilla for support of a complete denture prosthesis, a final or intermediate abutment for fixed bridgework or for partial dentures, or as a single tooth replacement.

Not Found

The provided text is a 510(k) premarket notification letter from the FDA regarding a dental implant device. It primarily focuses on the regulatory approval process and does not contain information about acceptance criteria or a study proving the device meets acceptance criteria. Therefore, I cannot extract the requested information from this document.

Ask a specific question about this device

The 5.0 x 5.0mm and the 6.0 x 5.0mm implants are designed as a one stage or two stage surgical procedure implant for use in edentulous sites in the mandible or maxilla for support of a complete denture prosthesis, a terminal or intermediate abutment for fixed bridgework, partial dentures, or a single tooth replacement

Not Found

I am sorry, but based on the provided text, I cannot provide the requested information. The document is a 510(k) clearance letter for a dental implant system. It discusses the regulatory approval process and states that the device is substantially equivalent to legally marketed predicate devices.

However, the text does not contain any information about acceptance criteria, device performance studies, sample sizes, ground truth establishment, or expert involvement as would be expected for an AI/ML device study. This document is a regulatory approval notice for a physical medical device, not a report on the performance of a software or algorithm.

Ask a specific question about this device