Search Results

Total hip replacement or hip arthroplasty is indicated in the following conditions:

1. A severely painful and/or disabled joint from osteoarthritis, rheumatoid arthritis, or congenital hip dysplasia.
2. Avascular necrosis of the femoral head.
3. Acute traumatic fracture of the femoral head or neck.
4. Failed previous hip surgery including joint reconstruction, arthrodesis, hemi-arthroplasty, surface replacement arthroplasty, or total hip replacement.
5. Certain cases of ankyloses.

Partial hip replacement or hip hemi-arthroplasty is indicated in the following conditions:

1. Acute fracture of the femoral head or neck that cannot be appropriately reduced and treation.
2. Fracture dislocation of the hip that cannot be appropriately reduced and treated with internal fixation.
3. Avascular necrosis of the femoral head.
4. Non-union of femoral neck fractures.
5. Certain high subcapital and femoral neck fractures in the elderly.
6. Degenerative arthritis involving only the femoral head in which the acetabulum does not require replacement.
7. Pathology involving only the femoral head/neck and/or proximal femur that can be adequately treated by hip hemi-arthroplasty.

HA coated stems of the Corail Hip system are indicated for cementless use only.

The DePuy Corail AMT hip stem family are manufactured from forged titanium alloy (Ti6A14V) and plasma-sprayed with a hydroxyapatite (HA) coating for bone fixation. The stem consists of a wide range of stem neck designs and sizes allowing an accurate anatomical match for each patient. Corail AMT stems are available with or without a collar, with various neck angles, and with various neck offsets.

The provided text is a 510(k) summary for the DePuy Corail AMT Hip Prosthesis. This document focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence to previously cleared devices rather than establishing novel device performance through extensive clinical trials or AI/ML studies.

Therefore, many of the requested criteria (such as sample size for test sets, expert qualifications, adjudication methods, MRMC studies, effect size of AI assistance, standalone performance, and details about training sets for AI devices) are not applicable to this type of regulatory submission as it does not involve an AI/ML device or a comparative effectiveness study with human readers.

However, the document does describe non-clinical tests conducted to support modifications to an existing device.

Here's a breakdown of the available information:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

The document does not explicitly present "acceptance criteria" in the format of a typical clinical trial or AI device validation study with specific performance metrics (e.g., sensitivity, specificity, accuracy). Instead, it lists various non-clinical tests performed to demonstrate product specifications and safety for changes introduced (new manufacturing site, increased shelf life, alternate manufacturing process). The "performance" is demonstrated by conforming to these established testing standards.

I will attempt to structure this into a table based on the non-clinical tests mentioned.

2. Sample size used for the test set and the data provenance
The document does not specify exact sample sizes for each non-clinical test. These tests typically involve a limited number of device samples or components subjected to specific mechanical, chemical, or aging conditions. There is no "data provenance" in terms terms of country of origin for patients, as no clinical data was used for this specific 510(k) submission. These are laboratory-based, non-clinical tests.

3. Number of experts used to establish the ground truth for the test set and the qualifications of those experts
Not applicable. Ground truth for non-clinical engineering tests is established by documented industry standards (e.g., ISO, ASTM) and internal quality control processes, not by expert consensus in a medical diagnostic sense.

4. Adjudication method (e.g. 2+1, 3+1, none) for the test set
Not applicable. No clinical test set requiring medical adjudication was used.

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
Not applicable. This is not an AI/ML device, and no MRMC study was conducted.

6. If a standalone (i.e. algorithm only without human-in-the-loop performance) was done
Not applicable. This is not an AI/ML device.

7. The type of ground truth used (expert consensus, pathology, outcomes data, etc.)
For the non-clinical tests, the "ground truth" is defined by the objective pass/fail criteria specified by the relevant ISO and ASTM standards cited. For example, a seal strength test has a numerical minimum requirement for a "pass."

8. The sample size for the training set
Not applicable. This is not an AI/ML device.

9. How the ground truth for the training set was established
Not applicable. This is not an AI/ML device.

Ask a specific question about this device

The DELTA XTEND™ Reverse Shoulder System is intended for use in total or hemi-shoulder arthroplasty procedures in patients with non-functional rotator cuffs, with or without bone cement. HA components are for cementless use only.

The DELTA XTEND™ Reverse Shoulder System is indicated for use in treatment of a grossly deficient rotator cuff joint with: severe arthropathy and/or; a previous failed joint replacement and/or: fracture-dislocations of the proximal humerus where the articular surface is severely comminuted, separated from its blood supply or where the surgeon's experience indicates that alternative methods of treatment are unsatisfactory The patient's joint must be anatomically and structurally suited to receive the selected implant(s), and a functional deltoid muscle is necessary to use the device. DELTA XTEND™ Reverse Shoulder System hemi-shoulder replacement is also indicated for hemi-arthroplasty if the glenoid is fractured intraoperatively or for the revision of a previously failed DELTA XTEND™ Reverse Shoulder System. The metaglene component is HA coated and is intended for cementless use with the addition of screws for fixation. All other metallic components are intended for cemented use only.

The DELTA XTEND™ Reverse Shoulder System is currently cleared and marketed by DePuy Synthes and is comprised of multiple humeral and glenoid implant components. These are provided as separate, standalone devices and may be used in conjunction to form a total shoulder prothesis. This submission is pertinent to only those system components which are HA coated: Humeral Implants: Modular humeral stems Modular epiphysis Glenoid Implants: Metaglenes

The provided text is a 510(k) Summary for the DELTA XTEND™ Reverse Shoulder System. It outlines the device, its intended use, and its substantial equivalence to previously cleared predicate devices.

However, the primary purpose of this submission (as stated in section 510(K) SUMMARY) is "to extend the current approved shelf life of 5 years to 10 years" of the DELTA XTEND™ Reverse Shoulder System.

Therefore, the performance data provided focuses solely on testing related to shelf-life extension, specifically regarding the HA coating on shelf-aged products. There is no information within this document about acceptance criteria or studies related to AI-powered medical devices, human reader improvements with AI assistance, or algorithm-only performance.

The document explicitly states:
"NO CLINICAL TESTS WERE CONDUCTED TO DEMONSTRATE SUBSTANTIAL EQUIVALENCE."

Therefore, I cannot provide the detailed information requested in your prompt regarding acceptance criteria, study details (sample sizes for test/training sets, data provenance), expert involvement, adjudication methods, MRMC studies, standalone performance, or ground truth establishment for an AI device, as this documentation pertains to a traditional medical device (shoulder replacement system) and not an AI/ML device.

Ask a specific question about this device

Total hip replacement or hip arthroplasty is indicated in the following conditions.

1. A severely painful and/or disabled joint from osteoarthritis, rheumatoid arthritis, or congenital hip dvsplasia.
2. Avascular necrosis of the femoral head.
3. Acute traumatic fracture of the femoral head or neck.
4. Failed previous hip surgery including joint reconstruction, arthrodesis, hem-arthroplasty, surface replacement arthroplasty, or total hip replacement.
5. Certain cases of ankvloses.

Partial hip replacement or hip hemi-arthroplasty is indicated in the following conditions:

1. Acute fracture of the femoral head or neck that cannot be appropriately reduced and treated with internal fixation.
2. Fracture dislocation of the hip that cannot be appropriately reduced and treated with internal fixation.
3. Avascular necrosis of the femoral head.
4. Non-union of femoral neck fractures.
5. Certain high subcapital and femoral neck fractures in the elderly.
6. Degenerative arthritis involving only the femoral head in which the acetabulum does not require replacement.
7. Pathology involving only the femoral head/neck and/or proximal femur that can be adequately treated by hip hemiarthroplasty.

HA coated stems of the Corail Hip system are indicated for cementless use only.

The DePuy Corail AMT hip stem family are manufactured from forged titanium alloy (Ti6Al4V) and plasma-sprayed with a hydroxyapatite (HA) coating for bone fixation. The stem consists of a wide range of stem neck designs and sizes allowing an accurate anatomical match for each patient. Corail AMT stems are available with or without a collar, with various neck angles, and with various neck offsets.

This document pertains to a 510(k) premarket notification for a medical device, the DePuy Corail AMT Hip Prosthesis. The purpose of this submission, as stated, is to extend the approved shelf life of the device from 5 years to 10 years.

Therefore, the "acceptance criteria" and "study that proves the device meets the acceptance criteria" are related to demonstrating that the device remains safe and effective for the extended shelf life, specifically focusing on the integrity of the Hydroxyapatite (HA) coating after extended aging.

Based on the provided text, while the document confirms the device's substantial equivalence for its extended shelf life, it does not contain the detailed information typically found in an AI/software as a medical device (SaMD) study regarding performance criteria, sample sizes, expert qualifications, or multi-reader studies. The studies mentioned are primarily non-clinical bench tests focused on material properties after aging.

Here's an attempt to answer your questions based only on the provided text, highlighting what is present and what is absent:

1. A table of acceptance criteria and the reported device performance

The document mentions specific non-clinical tests performed, implying that the acceptance criteria are related to meeting the standards outlined in those test methods. However, the exact quantitative acceptance criteria (e.g., "HA coating adhesion strength > X MPa") and the numerical results of the device performance against those criteria are not explicitly reported in the text. The document only confirms that these tests were performed and conclude substantial equivalence.

2. Sample sizes used for the test set and the data provenance

• Sample sizes for the test set: Not specified in the provided document. The text states "the following tests were performed," but does not mention the number of units tested.
• Data provenance: The tests were performed on "shelf-aged product." The country of origin of the data is not specified, but the applicant is DePuy (Ireland). The studies are inherently prospective in the sense that they are designed to simulate future aging, but performed in a controlled laboratory setting.

3. Number of experts used to establish the ground truth for the test set and the qualifications of those experts

• Number of experts and qualifications: Not applicable to this type of non-clinical bench testing. Ground truth for these tests is established by adhering to standardized test methods (ISO, ASTM) and using calibrated laboratory equipment and trained technicians/engineers. There is no human interpretation of images or clinical outcomes that would require expert consensus.

4. Adjudication method for the test set

• Adjudication method: Not applicable to this type of non-clinical bench testing. The results are quantitative measurements against established standards, not subjective interpretations requiring 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

• MRMC study: No. This device is a hip prosthesis, not an AI or imaging device. Therefore, MRMC studies are not relevant to its clearance.

6. If a standalone (i.e. algorithm only without human-in-the loop performance) was done

• Standalone performance: No. This is a physical medical device, not an algorithm.

7. The type of ground truth used

• Type of ground truth: For the non-clinical tests, the "ground truth" is defined by the standardized methodologies and specifications outlined in ISO and ASTM standards. For example, the ground truth for HA coating crystallinity would be the measurement obtained by a specified analytical technique (e.g., X-ray diffraction) that meets the criteria of ISO-13779-3.

8. The sample size for the training set

• Sample size for training set: Not applicable. This device does not involve machine learning or a "training set." The tests conducted are to confirm the physical properties of the device over its extended shelf life.

9. How the ground truth for the training set was established

• How ground truth was established: Not applicable. As there is no training set involved, this question is not relevant.

Ask a specific question about this device

Total hip replacement or hip arthroplasty is indicated in the following conditions:

1. A severely painful and/or disabled joint from osteoarthritis, rheumatoid arthritis, or congenital hip dysplasia.
2. Avascular necrosis of the femoral head.
3. Acute traumatic fracture of the femoral head or neck.
4. Certain cases of ankylosis.

Partial hip replacement or hip hemi-arthroplasty is indicated in the following conditions:

1. Acute fracture of the femoral head or neck that cannot be appropriately reduced and treated with internal fixation.
2. Fracture dislocation of the hip that cannot be appropriately reduced and treated with internal fixation.
3. Avascular necrosis of the femoral head.
4. Non-union of femoral neck fractures.
5. Certain high subcapital and femoral neck fractures in the elderly.
6. Degenerative arthritis involving only the femoral head in which the acetabulum does not require replacement.
7. Pathology involving only the femoral head/neck and/or proximal femur that can be adequately treated by hip hemi-arthroplasty.

The ACTISTM DUOFIX™ Hip Prosthesis is indicated for cementless use only.

The ACTIS Duofix™ Hip Prosthesis is identical to the previously cleared ACTIS Duofix™ Hip Prosthesis (K150862 & K160907). The ACTIS Duofix™ Hip prostheses are manufactured from forged titanium alloy (Ti6Al4V), have a sintered commercially pure titanium bead porous coating (Porocoat ®), and thin layer of plasma-sprayed hydroxyapatite (HA) coating. The stem consists of a wide range of stem neck designs and sizes allowing an anatomical match for each patient. The stems are compatible with both unipolar and bipolar heads intended for hip hemi-athroplasty and with modular metal or ceramic femoral heads intended for total hip arthroplasty.

The porous coating is applied over the proximal region of the stem. A thin coating of hydroxyapatite (HA) of uniform thickness is sprayed over the porous and distal stem areas via a plasma spray process. The HA powder used in the plasma spray process conforms to ASTM F1185-88 and ISO 13779-6 Hydroxyapatite (Ca5(PO4)3OH) ceramic. The plasma spray process used to apply the HA coating to the ACTIS Duofix™ Stem is the same process used to coat the SUMMIT Duofix™ Stem which was cleared in K193398. The HA material used for the ACTIS Duofix™ Stem is the same as the HA material used on the SUMMIT Duofix™ Stem. Thirteen sizes of prostheses are provided to allow high resolution of fit within host femora. Each size is offered in standard and high offset neck options, desired recreation of patient biomechanics in combination with head and liner combinations.

This document describes a 510(k) premarket notification for the ACTIS Duofix Hip Prosthesis, not an AI/ML powered device. Therefore, the requested information regarding acceptance criteria, study details, ground truth, and human reader performance with AI assistance is not applicable.

The submission focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence to previously cleared predicate devices through:

• Manufacturing changes: Adding DePuy Ireland as an alternate manufacturing facility for the HA coating process and DePuy Orthopaedics Inc. Warsaw IN as an alternate site for grit-blasting.
• Non-clinical performance data:
  • Biological safety per ISO 10993-1.
  • Characterization testing of Hydroxyapatite Coating per FDA Guidance.
  • Performance Bench Testing - Body (Distal) Fatigue Testing per ISO 7206-4 2010.

No clinical tests were conducted as part of this submission, nor are there any indications of an AI/ML component in the device.

Ask a specific question about this device