Search Results

Dental Soft Tissue Indications: Incision, excision, vaporization, ablation and coagulation of oral soft tissues, including marginal and inter-dental gingival and epithelial lining of free gingiva and the following specific indications: Excisional and incisional biopsies, Exposure of unerupted teeth, Fibroma removal, Frenectomy, Frenotomy, Gingival troughing for crown impressions, Gingivectomy, Gingivoplasty, Gingival incision and excision, Hemostasis and coagulation, Implant recovery, Incision and drainage of abscess, Leukoplakcia, Operculectomy, Oral papillectomies, Pulpotomy, Pulpotomy as an adjunct to root canal therapy, Reduction of gingival hypertrophy, Soft tissue crown lengthening, Treatment of canker sores, herpetic and aphthous ulcers of the oral mucosa, Vestibuloplasty, Tissue retraction for impression. Laser Periodontal Procedures, including: Laser soft tissue curettage, Laser removal of diseased, infected, inflamed and necrosed soft tissue within the periodontal pocket, Sulcular debridement (removal of diseased, infected, inflamed and necrosed soft tissue in the periodontal pocket to improve clinical indices including gingival index, gingival bleeding index, probe depth, attachment loss and tooth mobility).

Principle: The semiconductor laser diode is excited by the generation power supply to generate the laser, which is effectively transmitted to the treatment site through the optical fiber tip. Intended operator: Dental surgeon. Component part: It is composed of laser host (including internal power system, laser drive system, optical path system, LCD screen, emergency stop button, laser) and optic fiber tip. Sterile: The Fiber optic tip and the handpiece cover require sterilization prior to use.

This document is a 510(k) premarket notification for a Class II medical device, the Dental Diode Laser, SOGA Laser, ILaser II. It focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence to a predicate device (iLase™ by Biolase Technology, Inc., K093852) rather than proving meeting specific acceptance criteria through a performance study against a defined ground truth.

Therefore, the requested information regarding acceptance criteria, device performance, sample size, expert involvement, adjudication, MRMC studies, standalone performance, and ground truth establishment (which are typical for AI/ML-driven device performance studies) cannot be extracted from this document, as it describes a traditional medical device (a laser) and its regulatory submission based on substantial equivalence.

The document details the device's technical specifications and compares them to a predicate device to argue for substantial equivalence in safety and effectiveness, based primarily on non-clinical testing against recognized standards (e.g., IEC, ISO). Clinical testing was explicitly stated as not performed for this submission.

Here's what can be extracted based on the provided document, even though it doesn't align with the typical "acceptance criteria and study that proves the device meets the acceptance criteria" format for AI/ML devices:

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

This document does not present quantitative performance metrics against specific acceptance criteria for a "study" in the way an AI/ML device would. Instead, it compares technical specifications to a predicate device to demonstrate substantial equivalence. The "acceptance criteria" here are effectively "being substantially equivalent to the predicate device in terms of safety and effectiveness."

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

• Sample Size for Test Set: Not applicable. No clinical test set or data set for performance evaluation in the AI/ML sense was used. The submission relies on technical comparisons and non-clinical testing.
• Data Provenance: Not applicable for a "test set." The document refers to "literature referred [1]" for demonstrating efficiency equivalence but does not provide details of this literature.

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

• Not applicable. No ground truth establishment for a test set was performed, as it was a technical comparison for substantial equivalence.

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

• Not applicable. No adjudication was necessary as no test set requiring ground truth labeling 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:

• No MRMC study was done (or mentioned). This is a physical device (laser), not an AI-based diagnostic or assistive software.

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

• Not applicable. This is a physical laser device, not an algorithm.

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

• Not applicable. The basis for safety and effectiveness is "substantial equivalence" to a legally marketed predicate device, supported by compliance with international electrical, laser, and biocompatibility standards.

8. The sample size for the training set:

• Not applicable. This is not an AI/ML device requiring a training set.

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

• Not applicable.

Ask a specific question about this device

Intra- and extra-oral surgery including incision, excision, hemostasis, coagulation and vaporization of soft tissue; marginal and interdental gingival and epithelial lining of free gingiva; frenotomy; biopsy; operculectomy; Implant recovery; gingivectomy; gingival troughing; crown lengthening; hemostasis of donor site; removal of granulation tissue; laser assisted flap surgery; debridement of deseased epithelial lining ; incisions and draining of abscesses; tissue retraction for impressions; papillectomy; vestibuloplasty; excision of lesions ; exposure of unerupted/ partially erupted teeth; removal of hyperplastic tissues; treatment of aphthous ulcers; leukoplakia; Laser removal of diseased, inflamed and necrosed soft tissue within the periodontal pocket; Sulcular debridement (removal of diseased, inflamed and necrosed soft tissue in the periodontal pocket to improve clinical indices including gingival index, gingival bleeding index, probe depth, attachment loss and tooth inability); pulpotomy; pulpotomy as adjunct to root canal therapy; Fibroma removal; Gingival incision; Treatment of canker sores; herpetic ulcers of the oral mucosa: Laser soft tissue curettage: Reduction of gingival hypertrophy:.

The semiconductor laser diode is excited by the generation power supply to generate the laser, which is effectively transmitted to the treatment site through the optical fiber tip. It is composed of laser host (including internal power system, laser drive system, optical path system, LCD screen, emergency stop button, laser) and optic fiber tip. The device mainframe not supplied sterile and do not require sterilization prior to use. The consumable component (Fiber optic tip) not supplied sterile but require sterilization prior to use.

This document describes the regulatory submission for the Shenzhen Soga Technology Co., Ltd. Dental Diode Laser (Model: ILaser I). It focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence to a predicate device, SIROLaser Advance (Model: FonaLaser), rather than presenting a study to prove acceptance criteria with specific performance metrics.

Here's an analysis based on the provided text, addressing the requested information:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

The document does not specify quantitative acceptance criteria in terms of performance metrics (e.g., accuracy, sensitivity, specificity) for the device. Instead, it relies on demonstrating substantial equivalence to a predicate device through comparison of technological characteristics and adherence to recognized safety and performance standards. The "performance" reported is primarily that the device meets these safety and performance standards.

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

• Sample Size: Not applicable. This submission is based on demonstrating substantial equivalence to a predicate device and adherence to recognized standards, not on a clinical trial with a "test set" of patients or data in the typical sense for performance evaluation (e.g., diagnostic accuracy).
• Data Provenance: The "data" provided relates to the technical specifications of the device and its predicate, and results from non-clinical testing performed in accordance with international standards. The country of origin for the subject device is China (Shenzhen, Guangdong).

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

• Number of Experts: Not applicable. There was no "test set" with ground truth established by experts in the context of this 510(k) submission for this type of device. The evaluation relies on engineering, safety, and performance testing against established standards.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set

• Adjudication Method: Not applicable, as there was no test set requiring expert 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, an MRMC comparative effectiveness study was not performed. This device is a laser surgical instrument, not an AI-assisted diagnostic tool for "human readers."

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

• Standalone Performance: Not applicable. This device is a hardware surgical instrument, not an algorithm. Its performance is evaluated through physical and electrical safety, and functional testing, not standalone algorithmic performance.

7. The Type of Ground Truth Used (expert consensus, pathology, outcomes data, etc.)

• Type of Ground Truth: The "ground truth" in this context is the successful demonstration of compliance with established international safety and performance standards (IEC 60601-1, IEC 60601-1-2, IEC 60825-1, IEC 60601-2-22). This relies on objective measurement and testing against the requirements set by these standards, rather than expert consensus on diagnostic images or pathology.

8. The Sample Size for the Training Set

• Sample Size: Not applicable. This device is a physical instrument, not an AI model requiring a training set of data.

9. How the Ground Truth for the Training Set was Established

• Ground Truth Establishment: Not applicable, as there is no training set for this device.

Ask a specific question about this device