Search Filters

Search Results

Found 1 results

510(k) Data Aggregation

    K Number
    K974706
    Manufacturer
    Date Cleared
    1998-03-13

    (87 days)

    Product Code
    Regulation Number
    888.3060
    Reference & Predicate Devices
    N/A
    Why did this record match?
    Device Name :

    AESCULAP ABC CERVICAL PLATING SYSTEM

    AI/MLSaMDIVD (In Vitro Diagnostic)TherapeuticDiagnosticis PCCP AuthorizedThirdpartyExpeditedreview
    Intended Use

    The ABC Cervical Plating System is intended for the treatment of cervical spine instability resulting from degenerative disc disease (defined as discongenic pain with generation of the disc confirmed by history and radiographic studies), trauma (including fractures), post-traumatic kyphosis or lordosis, tumors, and re-operation for failed previous fusions through anterior cervical intervertebral body screw fixation. Levels of screw fixation for this indication are from C2 to T1.

    Device Description

    Not Found

    AI/ML Overview

    This document is a 510(k) summary for a medical device (ABC Cervical Plating System), which is a premarket submission to the FDA. It does not contain the kind of detailed study information (acceptance criteria, device performance, sample sizes, expert qualifications, ground truth, etc.) that would typically be found in a clinical trial report or a performance validation study.

    Therefore, I cannot provide a table of acceptance criteria and reported device performance or information about sample sizes, ground truth establishment, or expert involvement as requested.

    The document primarily focuses on:

    • Device Identification: Name, common names, classification, and product codes.
    • Intended Use Statement: Clarifying the medical conditions and anatomical levels for which the device is designed.
    • Regulatory Actions: FDA's determination of substantial equivalence, general controls, and specific warnings regarding off-label use (pedicular screw fixation).

    There is no mention of a study involving device performance metrics against predefined acceptance criteria in the provided text. The substantial equivalence determination by the FDA is based on comparison to legally marketed predicate devices, not on a detailed performance study like what would be described for an AI/algorithm-based device.

    Ask a Question

    Ask a specific question about this device

    Page 1 of 1