Search Results

SYNTHECEL® Dura Repair is indicated as a dura replacement for the repair of dura mater in adults.

SYNTHECEL® Dura Repair is composed of biosynthesized cellulose and water with a unique construction of non-woven, interconnected cellulose fibers. SYNTHECEL® Dura Repair functions as a mechanical layer which protects and repairs the dural defect while preventing further CSF leakage. SYNTHECEL® Dura Repair is immunologically inert and has demonstrated minimal foreign body response. It is non-resorbable.

The document provided is a 510(k) premarket notification for the SYNTHECEL Dura Repair device, seeking substantial equivalence to previously cleared predicate devices. It describes the device, its intended use, and the non-clinical performance data used to support its equivalence.

Here's an analysis of the provided text in relation to your request about acceptance criteria and a study proving the device meets them:

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

The document does not explicitly state "acceptance criteria" in a table format with specific numerical targets. Instead, it relies on demonstrating substantial equivalence to predicate devices through mechanical testing and biocompatibility. The reported performance is a statement of equivalence rather than meeting pre-defined numerical thresholds for a novel device.

However, based on the "Non-Clinical Performance Data" section, we can infer the areas of evaluation and the general outcome:

2. Sample size used for the test set and the data provenance (e.g. country of origin of the data, retrospective or prospective):

The document does not provide specific sample sizes for the mechanical testing (e.g., number of samples for burst strength or suture pull-out strength). It also does not specify the country of origin of the data or whether the non-clinical performance data was retrospective or prospective. It simply states that "Mechanical testing data was collected," implying lab-based testing.

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):

This information is not applicable to the provided document. The submission is for a medical device (dura repair), and the "test set" in this context refers to physical samples undergoing mechanical and biological evaluations, not diagnostic outputs requiring expert interpretation for ground truth establishment.

4. Adjudication method (e.g. 2+1, 3+1, none) for the test set:

This information is not applicable. Adjudication methods like 2+1 or 3+1 are typically used in clinical studies or studies involving human interpretation of data (e.g., medical imaging) to resolve discrepancies. The provided document focuses on non-clinical performance data of a physical device.

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:

This is not applicable. The device is SYNTHECEL Dura Repair, a physical medical device, not an AI or diagnostic tool that would involve human readers or MRMC studies.

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

This is not applicable. The device is a physical dura repair product, not an algorithm.

7. The type of ground truth used (expert consensus, pathology, outcomes data, etc.):

For the non-clinical performance data:

• Mechanical Testing (Burst Strength, Suture Pull-Out Strength): The "ground truth" is established through standardized laboratory testing methods that quantify physical properties according to accepted engineering and medical device standards. The comparison is against predicate device performance, implying the predicate's performance serves as the benchmark.
• Biocompatibility: The "ground truth" is established by adhering to international standards (ISO 10993-1) which define acceptable biological responses (e.g., non-irritating, non-cytotoxic).

8. The sample size for the training set:

This is not applicable. The submission is for a physical medical device, not an AI or machine learning model that requires a training set.

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

This is not applicable, as there is no training set for a physical medical device.

Ask a specific question about this device

The DePuy Synthes MAXFRAME™ Multi-Axial Correction System is indicated for external fixation of fractured long bones and bones of the foot, limb lengthening, and deformity correction in adult, children* (3-12), and adolescent* (12-21) patient populations. The DePuy Synthes MAXFRAME™ Multi- Axial Correction System utilizes software for assisting surgeons in treatment planning. *in which the growth plates have fused or will not be crossed.

The DePuy Synthes MAXFRAME™ Multi-Axial Correction System is indicated for the following treatments in adults, and in both children (3-12) and adolescents (12-21) in which the growth plates have fused or will not be crossed with hardware:
• fracture fixation (open and closed)
• pseudoarthrosis of long bones
• limb lengthening (epiphyseal or metaphyseal distraction)
• joint arthrodesis
• infected fractures or nonunions
• correction of bony or soft tissue deformities
• correction of segmental defects.

The DePuy Synthes MAXFRAME™ Multi Axial Correction System, is an external ring fixation system that consists of MAXFRAME Hardware (schanz screws, pins, struts, rings) and MAXFRAME Web Software, used in treatment of soft tissue and bone deformities.

The subject device MAXFRAME 3D II Software (Moderate Software Level of Concern) is a software re-write of the MAXFRAME Web Software to make it more efficient, simplify software upgrades for functionality and fixing of software anomalies or bugs. Additionally, based on surgeon feedbacks and voice of customer, new functionality has been added around how frames are identified on X-Rays/radiographic images and how the treatment of the deformity can be planned.

This document describes the MAXFRAME™ Multi-Axial Correction System (aka MAXFRAME) software, specifically the MAXFRAME 3D II Software. It is a software re-write of the existing MAXFRAME Web Software, cleared under K161417.

Here's an analysis of the provided text in relation to your request:

1. Table of acceptance criteria and the reported device performance:

The provided document (510(k) Summary) is a submission for substantial equivalence based on non-clinical performance testing. It does not contain specific acceptance criteria for performance metrics in a quantitative sense (e.g., accuracy, sensitivity, specificity). Instead, it generically states:

Important Note: This is a 510(k) summary for a software update to an existing device. The primary claim is substantial equivalence to the predicate device (MAXFRAME Web Software, K161417), meaning it performs similarly and raises no new questions of safety or effectiveness. As such, detailed quantitative performance metrics often associated with novel AI/ML devices or completely new technologies are typically not disclosed in this type of submission summary. The "acceptance criteria" here are focused on demonstrating that the new software maintains the safety and effectiveness profile of the predicate.

2. Sample size used for the test set and the data provenance:

The document explicitly states: "Non-clinical Performance Testing: The performance of the subject MAXFRAME 3D II Software has been evaluated by confirming that the outputs meet the input requirements and conform to the user needs and intended uses."

This indicates software verification and validation (V&V) activities were performed. However, the document does not specify a sample size for a "test set" in the context of clinical or image-based evaluation. Given it's a software re-write of an existing system, the testing likely involved functional testing, regression testing, and possibly performance testing against a set of representative cases or simulated scenarios to ensure calculations are correct and the user interface functions as expected.

The document does not specify the data provenance (e.g., country of origin, retrospective or prospective data) for any test cases used during V&V.

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

This information is not provided in the document. As it is a software re-write and not a novel diagnostic AI algorithm, the "ground truth" for V&V would likely be based on:

• Expected outputs from calculations based on well-defined anatomical parameters or clinical scenarios.
• Comparison to results from the predicate software.
• Expert review of UI/UX and functionality rather than diagnostic accuracy.

4. Adjudication method (e.g. 2+1, 3+1, none) for the test set:

This information is not provided. Given the nature of a software re-write, a formal adjudication process for diagnostic interpretations (like 2+1 review) is unlikely to be the primary method of evaluation. Software V&V typically uses internal testing protocols.

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:

No, a multi-reader multi-case (MRMC) comparative effectiveness study was not done. The document explicitly states: "Clinical Performance Data: Clinical data was not necessary for the determination of substantial equivalence." Therefore, there is no information about the effect size of human readers improving with AI assistance.

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

The document describes the device as providing "software for assisting surgeons in treatment planning." The "MAXFRAME 3D II Software" is a component of the "MAXFRAME™ Multi-Axial Correction System," which is an "external ring fixation system." This implies it's an assistive tool for a human-in-the-loop workflow (surgeons using the software for planning), not a standalone diagnostic algorithm designed to provide unassisted outputs.

While standalone software verification and validation was performed on the software alone to ensure its functionality and calculations are correct, this is distinct from proving clinical performance as a standalone diagnostic or assistive device in a clinical setting.

7. The type of ground truth used (expert consensus, pathology, outcomes data, etc):

The specific type of ground truth used for the software's verification and validation is not explicitly stated. For a software re-write focused on treatment planning and calculation, the "ground truth" would likely be derived from:

• Engineering specifications and requirements: Ensuring the software correctly implements the intended algorithms and calculations.
• Comparison to predicate device's output: Confirming that the new software produces equivalent results to the previous, cleared version for identical inputs.
• Industry standards or clinically accepted formulas: For calculations related to limb lengthening, deformity correction, etc.

It's highly unlikely that expert consensus on diagnostic images, pathology, or outcomes data was used as the ground truth for this software re-write's V&V, given the nature of the device (treatment planning software for an external fixator).

8. The sample size for the training set:

This information is not applicable and not provided. The MAXFRAME 3D II Software is a software re-write of an existing system, and the description does not suggest it employs machine learning or artificial intelligence that would require a "training set" in the conventional sense. It is a deterministic rule-based or algorithmic software for planning.

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

This information is not applicable and not provided, as there is no indication of a machine learning component requiring a training set with established ground truth.

Ask a specific question about this device

The DePuy Synthes Variable Angle Locking Patella Plating System is indicated for the fixation and stabilization of patellar fractures in normal and osteopenic bone in skeletally mature patients.

The DePuy Synthes Variable Angle Locking Patella Plating System is comprised of single-use, sterile implants which will be placed on the lateral rim and on the anterior surface of the fractured patella to provide fixation during bone healing. The system offers both a small and a large plate to provide fixation for various patella fracture patterns. The subject plates are available sterile and are manufactured from implant grade stainless steel or titanium.

The system also consists of sterile, non-implantable templates that correspond to the implants. Templates are intended to help determine proper sizing and help predict contoured shape of the implant.

The provided text ("K210408") is a 510(k) premarket notification for a medical device: the DePuy Synthes Variable Angle Locking Patella Plating System. This type of FDA submission is for devices seeking substantial equivalence to a legally marketed predicate device, rather than proving safety and effectiveness through extensive clinical trials.

Therefore, the document does not contain the information requested regarding acceptance criteria and a study that proves the device meets those criteria, specifically concerning AI/ML performance metrics, sample sizes for test/training sets, expert adjudication, or MRMC studies.

The "Non-clinical performance data" section refers to:

• Mechanical testing: This is to demonstrate "substantially equivalent" performance to the predicate device under static and dynamic loading conditions. This is not a clinical study and doesn't involve "acceptance criteria" in the sense of accuracy, sensitivity, or specificity for a diagnostic or AI-driven device.
• Magnetic Resonance compatibility testing: To establish MR Conditional parameters.
• Endotoxin testing: To meet specified endotoxin requirements.

The "Clinical performance data" section explicitly states: "Clinical testing was not necessary for the determination of substantial equivalence."

In summary, the provided document does not describe the kind of study and acceptance criteria you're asking about, which are typically associated with AI/ML-driven diagnostic or image analysis devices. This document is for a mechanical orthopedic implant demonstrating substantial equivalence based on engineering and material performance, not clinical outcome or algorithmic performance.

Therefore, I cannot populate the table or answer the specific questions about AI/ML study design and performance metrics based on the provided text.

Ask a specific question about this device

DePuy Synthes 3.5 mm/4.5 mm VA-LCP PPFx Proximal Femur Plates and Proximal Femur Hook Plates are indicated for the treatment of periprosthetic fractures in the presence of intramedullary implants in the proximal end segment and the proximal and middle 1/3 of the diaphyseal segment of the femur, and non-unions of such fractures, in adult patients, particularly in osteoporotic and osteopenic bone.

DePuy Synthes 3.5 mm VA Locking Attachment Plate is indicated to augment the stabilization of fractures, including periprosthetic fractures (Vancouver Type B when used with either the 3.5 mm VA-LCP PPFx Proximal Femur Plate or Proximal Femur Hook Plate; Vancouver Type B and C when used with other DePuy Synthes LCP plates and VA-LCP plates) and fractures in the presence of intramedullary implants, in the femur, tibia, and humerus.

DePuy Synthes 3.5 mm VA Locking PPFx Distal Femur Spanning Attachment Plates (when used with either 3.5 mm/4.5 mm VA-LCP PPFx Proximal Femur Plate or the Proximal Femur Hook Plate) can be used to extend the length of a plate construct to the lateral condyles.

DePuy Synthes 3.5 mm VA Locking PPFX Greater Trochanter Ring Attachment Plates (when used with 3.5 mm/4.5 mm VA-LCP PPFx Proximal Femur Plate) are indicated for fixation or re-attachment of the greater trochanter following fracture or osteotomy.

DePuy Synthes 3.5 mm VA Locking PPFX Greater Trochanter Hook Plates are indicated for fixation or re-attachment of the greater trochanter following fracture or osteotomy.

The DePuy Synthes 3.5/4.5 mm Variable Angle LCP Periprosthetic Proximal Femur Plating System of Stainless Steel Plates for periprosthetic fractures. It consists of plates that offer screw to plate non-locking constructs, locking constructs or a combination of both. The plates accept commercially available DePuy Synthes Stainless Steel 3.5 mm cortex screws, 3.5 mm (variable angle) locking screws, 4.5 mm cortex screws and 5.0 mm (variable angle) locking screws, as well as the Synthes Orthopaedic Cable system.

The DePuy Synthes 3.5/4.5 mm Variable Angle LCP Periprosthetic Proximal Femur Plating System offers:
• 3.5 mm/4.5 mm VA-LCP PPFx Proximal Femur Plates
• 3.5 mm/4.5 mm VA-LCP PPFx Proximal Femur Hook Plates
• 3.5 mm VA Locking PPFx Distal Femur Spanning Attachment Plate
• 3.5 mm VA Locking PPFx Greater Trochanter Hook Plate
• 3.5 mm VA Locking PPFx Greater Trochanter Ring Attachment Plate
• 3.5 mm VA Locking Attachment Plate

This document is a 510(k) Premarket Notification from the FDA for a medical device. It describes the device, its intended use, and its comparison to predicate devices, along with non-clinical performance data. However, it does NOT describe an AI/ML powered device, nor does it contain any information about a study proving device meets acceptance criteria related to AI/ML performance, such as human reader improvement with AI assistance, standalone algorithm performance, or the establishment of ground truth by multiple experts.

Therefore, I cannot provide the requested information. The document focuses on the substantial equivalence of a physical orthopedic implant system to existing predicate devices, based on mechanical, MRI compatibility, sterilization, shelf-life, and biological safety testing. It does not mention any AI or machine learning components.

Ask a specific question about this device

The DePuy Synthes Retrograde Femoral Nail Advanced System is intended to stabilize fractures of the distal femur and the femoral shaft, including:

• Supracondylar fractures, including those with intra-articular extension
• Combination of ipsilateral condylar and diaphyseal fractures
• Ipsilateral femur/tibia fractures
• Femoral fractures in multiple trauma patients
• Periprosthetic fractures
• Fractures in the morbidly obese
• Fractures in osteoporotic bone
• Impending pathologic fractures
• Malunions and nonunions

The DePuy Synthes Locking Screws for Medullary Nails, 5.0 mm are indicated for the static and dynamic interlocking of femoral, humeral and tibial nails.

The proposed Retrograde Femoral Nail Advanced System is being developed to address challenges associated with treating distal femur fractures with intramedullary nails. The system is modular in nature, incorporating several components to allow for the treatment of a variety of fracture patterns and in the presence of previously implanted devices such as the femoral components of a total knee arthroplasty (periprosthetic). The nailing implants are available in two different bends which enable standard and periprosthetic entry points for the insertion of the nailing implant in the femur. The implants in this submission are manufactured from titanium alloys, stainless steel and polyethylene and are provided in a range of dimensions. The DePuy Synthes Locking Screws for Medullary Nails, 5.0 mm feature a retaining screw head recess, additional shorter, rounded cutting flutes the ability to drive under power. The screws feature either a standard screw head or a low-profile screw head and are available with standard washers and nuts.

The provided text ({0}-{5}) does not contain information about acceptance criteria or a study that uses a test set, ground truth, or human readers for performance evaluation. This document is a 510(k) premarket notification letter for a medical device (DePuy Synthes Retrograde Femoral Nail Advanced System and Locking Screws).

The text explicitly states:
"Clinical testing was not necessary for the determination of substantial equivalence." (Page 4, under "Clinical Performance Data")

Instead, the submission relies on non-clinical performance data to demonstrate substantial equivalence to predicate devices. These non-clinical tests are primarily mechanical and material tests conducted according to ASTM standards.

Therefore, I cannot populate the requested information regarding acceptance criteria, reported device performance, sample sizes for test sets, data provenance, expert ground truth establishment, adjudication methods, MRMC studies, standalone performance, or ground truth for training/test sets.

The information that is present regarding performance comes from non-clinical engineering tests:

• Non-clinical Performance Data for Retrograde Femoral Nail Advanced System:

  • Static Bend according to ASTM F1264
  • Static Torsion according to ASTM F1264
  • Dynamic Bend according to ASTM F1264
  • Mechanical Static Construct
  • Poly Inlay Screw Pull Out Test and Debris Evaluation

• Non-clinical Performance Data for DePuy Synthes Locking Screws for Medullary Nails, 5.0:

  • Torsional Properties according to ASTM F543
  • Driving Torque & Axial Pushout according to ASTM F543
  • Driving Torque according to ASTM F543
  • Self-tapping Performance according to ASTM F543
  • Finite Element Analysis for 3-Point Bending according to ASTM 1264

• Other Additional Analysis:

  • Endotoxin Testing according to AAMI ST72
  • MRI Conditional analysis performed (though not released with MR Conditional labeling)

These tests are designed to show that the mechanical properties and safety (e.g., in terms of materials and manufacturing) of the new device are comparable to those of existing, legally marketed predicate devices, thereby establishing "substantial equivalence" without requiring human-data-based clinical performance studies.

Ask a specific question about this device

The DePuy Synthes MatrixMANDIBLE Plate and Screw System is intended for oral, maxillofacial surgery; trauma; reconstructive surgery; and orthognathic surgery (surgical correction of dentofacial deformities).

The Synthes MatrixMANDIBLE Plate and Screw System consists of a variety of plates offered in multiple shapes and sizes and a variety of screws offered in multiple diameters and lengths to meet the anatomical needs of the patient. System implants are manufactured in either titanium or titanium alloy and are intended for single use only.

The Synthes MatrixMANDIBLE screws that are the subject of this submission are made from titanium alloy (Ti-6Al-7Nb) and are available in a diameter of 2.4 mm and lengths ranging from 26-40mm, and have a thread pitch of 1.0 mm. These screws work with all plates within the MatrixMANDIBLE Plate and Screw system.

These devices are offered non-sterile and must be sterilized before use. MatrixMANDIBLE screws are intended for single use only.

The provided text is a 510(k) premarket notification for a medical device, specifically the DePuy Synthes 2.4mm Ti Self-Tapping MatrixMANDIBLE Screws. This document details the device description, indications for use, comparison to predicate devices, and non-clinical performance testing for substantial equivalence.

However, the request asks for specific information regarding acceptance criteria and a study proving a device meets those criteria, particularly in the context of an AI/algorithm-based diagnostic or assistive device.

The document does not contain information about acceptance criteria or studies related to AI performance, sensitivity, specificity, MRMC studies, ground truth establishment for AI, or training/test set sizes for an algorithm.

Instead, it focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence for a physical implantable device.

Therefore, I cannot extract the requested information from the provided text as it pertains to a different type of device evaluation. The document describes:

• Device: DePuy Synthes 2.4mm Ti Self-Tapping MatrixMANDIBLE Screws (26-40mm)
• Purpose of Submission: To introduce a non-sterile packaged version of the screws with additional lengths (26mm - 40mm).
• Performance Testing: Non-clinical performance testing was conducted per ASTM F543 to compare the proposed screws to a reference device, demonstrating non-inferior mechanical performance. Sterilization adoption, packaging validation, and biocompatibility evaluations were also performed.
• Clinical Data: "Clinical data was not necessary for the determination of substantial equivalence."

In summary, the provided document does not contain the information required to answer your specific questions regarding acceptance criteria and studies for an AI-driven device.

Ask a specific question about this device

The DePuy Synthes Variable Angle Locking Patella Plating System is indicated for the fixation and stabilization of patellar fractures in normal and osteopenic bone in skeletally mature patients.

The DePuy Synthes Variable Angle Locking Patella Plating System is comprised of implants which will be placed on the anterior surface of the fractured patella to provide fixation during bone healing. The system offers three plate configurations, in two sizes, to provide fixation for various patella fracture patterns and are available in implant grade stainless steel and titanium. The system also consists of sterile, non-implantable templates that correspond to the implants. Templates are intended to help determine proper sizing and help predict contoured shape of the implant.

Here's an analysis of the provided FDA 510(k) summary regarding the DePuy Synthes Variable Angle Locking Patella Plating System:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

This document does not specify quantitative acceptance criteria. Instead, it relies on demonstrating non-inferiority of the subject device (DePuy Synthes Variable Angle Locking Patella Plating System) compared to a predicate device (Synthes 2.4 mm / 2.7 mm Variable Angle LCP Forefoot / Midfoot System (K100776)) through mechanical testing.

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

The document does not explicitly state the sample size for the mechanical performance testing (e.g., number of plates/screws tested). It mentions "testing of constructs (plate with screws)," implying multiple test units.

• Test Set Sample Size: Not explicitly stated for mechanical testing.
• Data Provenance: The tests are described as "non-clinical performance data," indicating laboratory-based testing rather than patient data. The country of origin for the data is not specified, but the sponsor is Synthes (USA) Products, LLC in Pennsylvania, USA. The data is prospective as it was generated to support the 510(k) submission.

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

This information is not applicable as the evaluation is based on non-clinical, mechanical, and safety (MR compatibility, endotoxin) testing, not on clinical interpretation requiring expert consensus.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set

This information is not applicable as the evaluation is based on non-clinical, objective measurements rather than expert review of clinical cases.

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

There was no MRMC comparative effectiveness study done. This device is a medical implant (bone fixation system) and not an AI-powered diagnostic or assistive tool.

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

This information is not applicable. This device is a mechanical implant, not software or an algorithm.

7. The type of ground truth used (expert consensus, pathology, outcomes data, etc.)

The "ground truth" for this device's evaluation is primarily based on:

• Engineering Standards and Measurements: For mechanical performance (e.g., force, displacement, fatigue life), MR compatibility parameters, and endotoxin levels, the "ground truth" is defined by established engineering and safety standards, test methodologies, and measurable physical properties.
• Predicate Device Performance: The primary comparison is against the mechanical performance of a legally marketed predicate device, which serves as a benchmark for expected performance and safety.

8. The sample size for the training set

This information is not applicable as there is no mention of a "training set" in the context of this mechanical device's evaluation. It is not an AI/machine learning product.

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

This information is not applicable as there is no "training set" for this mechanical device.

Ask a specific question about this device

DePuy Synthes Tibial Nail Advanced System:

The Tibial Nail Advanced implants are intended for treatment of fractures in adolescents (12-21) in which the growth plates have fused. Specifically, the implants are indicated for:

• · Open and closed proximal and distal tibial fractures
• Open and closed tibial shaft fractures
• · Tibial malunions and nonunions

DePuy Synthes Locking Screws for Medullary Nails, 4.0 and 5.0 mm:

DePuy Synthes Locking Screws are used for the static and dynamic interlocking of femoral, humeral and tibial nails.

DePuy Synthes Tibial Nail Advanced System:
The DePuy Synthes Tibial Nail Advanced System is a system comprised of intramedullary nails, locking screws, end caps implants, as well as system-specific insertion instruments. The Tibial Nail Advanced System is intended to be used for temporary fixation and stabilization of tibia. This system enables three different surgical approaches for the insertion of the nailing implant in the tibia: suprapatellar. parapatellar, and infrapatellar. The implants are manufactured from titanium alloys and provided in a range of dimensions to match individual patient anatomy. The intramedullary nailing implants are cannulated and can be inserted over a reaming rod. The nailing implants are offered in a range of proximal and distal shaft diameters and lengths to accommodate patient anatomy and surgical need related to the specific fracture patterns and locations. The nails will be manufactured from titanium alloy (Ti-6Al-4V) and polyetherketone (PEEK).

DePuy Synthes Locking Screws for Medullary Nails, 4.0 and 5.0 mm:

The DePuy Synthes Locking Screws for Medullary Nails, 4.0 and 5.0 mm have a diameter of 5 mm available in lengths ranging from 26 up to 120 mm and a diameter of 4 mm available in lengths ranging from 18 up to 80 mm. These implantable devices are fully threaded at the shaft and are self-tapping. The locking screws feature either a standard screw head or a low-profile screw head. The screws are made from titanium alloy (Ti-6Al-7Nb).

This appears to be a 510(k) summary for a medical device (DePuy Synthes Tibial Nail Advanced System and Locking Screws). These submissions typically focus on demonstrating substantial equivalence to a predicate device rather than presenting detailed studies with specific acceptance criteria, sample sizes, and expert adjudication for AI/software performance.

Therefore, the requested information regarding AI/software performance studies, acceptance criteria, sample sizes for test/training sets, expert ground truth establishment, adjudication methods, and MRMC studies is not present in the provided document.

This document describes a traditional medical device (implants and screws for bone fixation) and its non-clinical performance data (mechanical testing, biocompatibility, MRI safety), comparing it to predicate devices. There is no mention of any AI or software component in this device.

Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance:

Since this document describes a physical medical device (implants and screws) and not an AI/software device, the acceptance criteria and performance are based on non-clinical tests comparing it to predicate devices. The document states that the new device is "substantially equivalent" to predicate devices, meaning it performs at least as safely and effectively.

Regarding AI/Software specific questions:

1. Sample size used for the test set and the data provenance: Not applicable. This document does not describe an AI/software device or a test set of data.
2. Number of experts used to establish the ground truth for the test set and the qualifications of those experts: Not applicable. No ground truth for an AI/software test set is mentioned.
3. Adjudication method for the test set: Not applicable. No adjudication for an AI/software test set is mentioned.
4. 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. No AI component is described.
5. If a standalone (i.e. algorithm only without human-in-the-loop performance) was done: Not applicable. No AI component is described.
6. The type of ground truth used (expert consensus, pathology, outcomes data, etc): Not applicable. The "ground truth" for these devices would be established by physical measurements and engineering standards.
7. The sample size for the training set: Not applicable. No AI component is described.
8. How the ground truth for the training set was established: Not applicable. No AI component is described.

Ask a specific question about this device

The DePuy Synthes Hammertoe Continuous Compression Implant is indicated for small bone reconstruction and fusion of the phalanges in the toes.

The implants of the DePuy Synthes Hammertoe Continuous Compression Implant System are made of biocompatible Nitinol and are designed to exhibit pseudoelastic (superelastic) properties at room temperature. Each implant is supplied pre-loaded on an insertion stick assembly in a constrained state, with the legs parallel. It is inserted into pre-drilled holes and released utilizing the insertion slider and if necessary, impaction on the proximal end of the insertion stick. Upon release, the implants attempt to return to their original unconstrained shape and thus provide compression to the bones across the osteotomy or arthrodesis site. The implants do not require any external heating; they are completely transformed at ambient temperature. In good bone quality, this deflection may not be visible as the legs are constrained by the surrounding tissue. The implant is offered in two (2) sizes to address varying patient anatomy of the foot. The implant is delivered to the operating room in a disposable, sterile kit, preloaded onto a handheld insertion stick assembly along with a drill pin, drill guide, locator pins and K-wires.

The provided text is a 510(k) summary for the DePuy Synthes Hammertoe Continuous Compression Implant. It outlines the device description, indications for use, comparison to predicate devices, and non-clinical performance data.

However, it explicitly states:

"Clinical testing was not necessary for the determination of substantial equivalence."

This means that a study proving the device meets specific acceptance criteria based on clinical performance was not performed, nor was it required for this 510(k) clearance. The clearance was based on demonstrating substantial equivalence to existing legally marketed predicate devices through technological characteristics and non-clinical testing.

Therefore, I cannot provide the requested information, which pertains to clinical acceptance criteria and a study demonstrating their achievement, as such a study was not conducted for this device clearance.

Ask a specific question about this device

The TOMOFIX™ Medial High Tibia Plates are indicated for open- and closed-wedge osteotomies, fixation of fractures, and malalignment caused by injury or disease of the medial proximal tibia for the treatment of: Unicompartmental medial or lateral gonarthrosis with malalignment of the proximal tibia Idiopathic or posttraumatic varus or valgus deformity of the proximal tibia

The subject Titanium TomoFix™ Medial High Tibia Plate Anatomical is anatomically precontoured to fit the medial side of the proximal tibia (also referred to as high tibia) and is provided in a 'left' and 'right' version to accommodate the anatomy of the tibia in the left and right knee, respectively. The plate features seven round, threaded locking holes to provide a locked, fixed-angle construct and one combination locking / dynamic compression hole to allow temporary compression during the surgery. The subject plate is designed to accept existing, previously cleared 5.0 mm Locking Screws, 4.5 mm Cortex Screws and 5.0 mm Spacers

I am sorry, but the provided text does not contain information about the acceptance criteria and study proving a device meets those criteria, as typically found in a medical device submission beyond a 510(k) summary. The document appears to be a 510(k) clearance letter and summary for a bone plate, focusing on substantial equivalence to a predicate device.

The 510(k) Summary for the "Titanium TomoFix™ Medial High Tibia Plate Anatomical" primarily addresses the substantial equivalence documentation, which involves comparing a new device to a legally marketed predicate device rather than establishing performance against specific acceptance criteria for a novel or de novo device.

Therefore, I cannot extract the following information from the provided text:

1. A table of acceptance criteria and the reported device performance: This document does not present quantitative performance metrics against predefined acceptance criteria for clinical or algorithmic performance. It discusses mechanical testing for equivalence.
2. Sample size used for the test set and the data provenance: Not applicable to this type of submission, which relies on mechanical testing for equivalence, not a clinical test set of patient data.
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 clinical data is not established in this document.
4. Adjudication method for the test set: Not applicable.
5. If a multi-reader multi-case (MRMC) comparative effectiveness study was done: Not applicable. This is for a physical orthopedic implant, not an AI/imaging device requiring reader studies.
6. If a standalone (i.e., algorithm only without human-in-the-loop performance) was done: Not applicable.
7. The type of ground truth used: Not applicable. The "ground truth" here is mechanical equivalence demonstrated through testing against the predicate.
8. The sample size for the training set: Not applicable to a physical implant.
9. How the ground truth for the training set was established: Not applicable.

What the document does state regarding performance and equivalence:

• Acceptance Criteria & Performance (Implied for Equivalence): The document states that "Mechanical testing demonstrates substantial equivalence of the subject device to the predicate device." And "The subject device was tested under static and dynamic loading conditions to demonstrate mechanical equivalence compared to the predicate device." While specific numerical acceptance criteria (e.g., "must withstand X N of force") and reported performance values are not tabulated, the implicit acceptance criterion is that its mechanical performance is demonstrably equivalent to the predicate.
• The product is a "Titanium TomoFix™ Medial High Tibia Plate Anatomical," a bone plate used for osteotomies and fracture fixation. This is a physical orthopedic implant, not an AI/software device.
• The study referenced is mechanical testing (static and dynamic loading conditions) to demonstrate equivalence to the predicate device, not a study involving human readers or clinical data interpretation.
• Predicate Device: Titanium TomoFix™ Medial High Tibia Plate (cleared via K023941).
• Reference Device: TomoFix™ Medial High Tibia Plate, Small (cleared via K100676).

Therefore, this document does not contain the information requested, as it pertains to a different type of device submission (a 510(k) for substantial equivalence of a physical implant) than what your query implies (likely a software or AI/ML medical device).

Ask a specific question about this device