Search Results

The Ambient Hip Vac 50 Wand with Integrated Finger Switches is indicated for the resection and ablation of soft tissue, and hemostasis of blood vessels less than 1 mm (via coagulation) in the following arthroscopic and orthopedic procedures:

The Ambient HipVac 50 Wand is a bipolar, high frequency (HF) electrosurgical device designed for resection and ablation of soft tissue, and hemostasis of blood vessels less than 1 mm (via coagulation) in the indicated arthroscopic and orthopedic procedures (K161481).

The Ambient HipVac 50 Wand consist of a handle, shaft, integrated cable, and suction tubing. The integrated cable and suction tubing are attached to the proximal end of the handle and connect to the Controller and hospital wall suction, respectively. The plastic molded handle includes three integrated finger switches (IFS) used to activate and adjust the Coblation (ablation) and Coagulation modes: CUT (ablation), COAG (coagulation), and set point adjustment. The Ambient feature provides accurate (± 3° C) real-time temperature monitoring of the circulating irrigating fluid between 20°C and includes a user adjustable alarm set point. The Wand is designed for use up to 15 minutes of cumulative active ablation and is currently cleared to be used with ArthroCare System 12000 (QUANTUM II). Alternately, the surgeon can control these functions with the optional foot pedal.

The WEREWOLF COBLATION Systems (RF20000, WEREWOLF, WEREWOLF+) consist of a bipolar, radiofrequency (RF) generator (COBLATION System) with Integrated Fluid Module (FLOW IQ Pump) and Operational Interface Screen, Re-usable, non-sterile Foot Control (wired or wireless), Sterile, disposable, single-use COBLATION Wand(s), and Reusable, non-sterile power cord. The systems utilize bipolar technology specifically designed for the resection, ablation, and coagulation of blood vessels in various arthroscopic, orthopedic, and otorhinolaryngology (ENT) procedures. The controllers are enclosed units with incorporated software that runs both the delivery of radiofrequency energy as well as a Graphical User Interface which the user can control various modes, levels, volume, etc.

The provided text describes a 510(k) premarket notification for a medical device, the Ambient HipVac 50 Wand, to be used with newer COBLATION Systems (RF20000, WEREWOLF, WEREWOLF+). This is not a submission for an AI/ML medical device, but rather for an electrosurgical cutting and coagulation device.

Therefore, the requested information regarding acceptance criteria and study proving device meets acceptance criteria related to AI/ML device performance (e.g., sample sizes for test and training sets, number of experts, adjudication methods, MRMC studies, standalone performance, ground truth establishment) is not applicable to this document. The document focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence to a predicate device through non-clinical performance testing.

However, I can extract the information relevant to this medical device's performance testing for substantial equivalence:

Device Under Review: Ambient HipVac 50 Wand with Integrated Finger Switches, to be used with RF20000 COBLATION System, WEREWOLF COBLATION System, and WEREWOLF+ COBLATION System.

Predicate Device: Ambient HipVac 50 Wand with ArthroCare System 12000 (QUANTUM II).

Summary of Device Performance and Equivalence Justification:

The submission argues for substantial equivalence based on the following:

• Identical Intended Use, Indications for Use, Fundamental Technology, and Principle of Operation: The subject devices and the primary predicate share these core characteristics.
• Minor Technological Differences in Controllers: The newer COBLATION systems (RF20000, WEREWOLF, WEREWOLF+) incorporate a Graphical User Interface (GUI), an Integrated Fluid Outflow Regulator, and updated software versions. However, the manufacturer states that no changes were made to the 18-pin wand functionality used by the HipVac 50 Wand, and all required system-level testing for these controllers was previously conducted (K162074, K192027, K210423).
• No Changes to the Ambient HipVac 50 Wand Accessory: The wand itself (materials, specifications, electrical safety, sterilization, etc.) remains unchanged from the predicate accessory.

Details on Performance Testing (Non-Clinical):

The RF20000 COBLATION system was selected as the representative model for all WEREWOLF COBLATION Systems for non-clinical testing due to identical hardware and 18-pin software functionality across RF20000, WEREWOLF, and WEREWOLF+ controllers.

1. Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance:

The document does not provide a quantitative table of "Acceptance Criteria" for specific metrics, as it is a substantial equivalence submission based on comparative performance and unchanged characteristics rather than a de novo approval requiring novel performance targets. However, the functional tests performed and the conclusion implicitly refer to meeting existing performance expectations for the device type.

Functional Tests Included:

• Coagulation testing
• Ablation life (at 1X, 2X, 3X life)
• Ambient accuracy
• Finger switch functionality
• Shaft temperature
• Suction tube temperature

Pre-clinical Bench Testing (Ex Vivo):

• Measurements: Thermal effect width, ablation depth (amount of tissue removed), and thermal effect depth.
• Tissue Models: Bovine myocardium (muscle), cartilage, meniscus, and tendon.
• Test Conditions: Minimum, default, and maximum ablation set points.
• Reported Performance: Demonstrated that the Ambient HipVac 50 with RF20000 COBLATION System performs substantially equivalent to the predicate (Ambient HipVac 50 with QUANTUM 2) in these ex vivo tests.

Additional Performance Testing:

• Test: Comparison of the peak temperature of the electrode during ablation at the maximum set point.
• Methodology: Tested with both the predicate QUANTUM II and the representative subject RF20000 COBLATION system. Used a Neoptix T1 fiber optic temperature probe (model T1S-02-W05-PT05).
• Tissue Model: Beef heart tissue.
• Activation: Devices activated directly over the temperature probe for 10 seconds at maximum ablation setpoint (9) with auxiliary suction.
• Reported Performance: Maximum temperatures recorded using both controllers were similar, supporting evidence of substantial equivalence.

2. Sample Size and Data Provenance:

• Test Set Sample Size: Not explicitly stated as a number of "samples" in the context of a dataset. The testing refers to functional tests, ex-vivo bench testing, and comparative temperature measurements on tissue models. No patient data is involved.
• Data Provenance: This is non-clinical, bench testing data, likely performed in a lab setting by the manufacturer (ArthroCare Corporation, Austin, Texas). Details on the country of origin for the data are not provided beyond the company's location. The data is implicitly "prospective" in the sense of being generated specifically for this submission.

3. Number of Experts to Establish Ground Truth and Qualifications:

• Not Applicable: This is an electrosurgical device, not an AI/ML medical device requiring expert consensus for image or signal interpretation. The ground truth for performance is established through direct physical measurements on tissue models and functional tests, not through expert annotation.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set:

• Not Applicable: No human interpretation/adjudication is described in the performance tests. The results are objective measurements.

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

• Not Applicable: This type of study is relevant for AI-assisted diagnostic or interpretative devices, not an electrosurgical cutting device.

6. Standalone Performance (Algorithm Only):

• Not Applicable: There is no "algorithm only" performance to evaluate. The device is a physical electrosurgical system.

7. Type of Ground Truth Used:

• Objective Measurements/Physical Properties: The "ground truth" for this device's performance is established by direct measurement of physical parameters (e.g., ablation depth, thermal effect width, temperature, functional activation) in controlled ex vivo environments, rather than human expert labels, pathology, or outcomes data.

8. Sample Size for the Training Set:

• Not Applicable: This device is not an AI/ML device that requires a "training set" in the computational learning sense.

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

• Not Applicable: See point 8.

Ask a specific question about this device

The Ambient HipVac 50 Wand with Integrated Finger Switches is indicated for resection and ablation of soft tissue, and hemostasis of blood vessels less than 1 mm (via coagulation) in the following arthroscopic and orthopedic procedures: All Joints (Hip, Knee, Shoulder, Wrist, Ankle, Elbow) for Ablation/Debridement of Articular Cartilage, Bursectomy, Chondroplasty, Fascia, Ligament, Scar Tissue, Soft Tissue, Synovectomy, Tendon and for Excision/Resection of Articular Labrum, Capsule, Cysts, Ligament, Loose Bodies, Plica Removal, Scar Tissue, Soft Tissue, Synovial Membrane, Tendon. Hip for Excision/Resection of Acetabular Labrum. Knee for Ablation/Debridement of ACL/PCL, Notchplasty and for Excision/Resection of Capsular Release, Cartilage Flaps, Discoid Meniscus, Lateral Release, Meniscal Cystectomy, Meniscectomy, Villusectomy. Shoulder for Ablation/Debridement of Acromioplasty, Subacromial Decompression and for Excision/Resection of Frozen Shoulder Release, Glenoid Labrum. Wrist for Excision/Resection of Triangular Fibrocartilage.

Not Found

I regret to inform you that the provided text does not contain information about acceptance criteria or a study proving that a device meets those criteria. The document is an FDA 510(k) clearance letter for the "Ambient HipVac 50 Wand with Integrated Finger Switches."

This document primarily states:

• The FDA has reviewed the 510(k) notification and determined the device is substantially equivalent to legally marketed predicate devices.
• The indications for use for the device, which specify the arthroscopic and orthopedic procedures and the tissues (for ablation/debridement and excision/resection) the device is intended for.

It does not include:

• A table of acceptance criteria and reported device performance.
• Details about sample sizes for test sets, data provenance, or expert qualifications.
• Information on adjudication methods or multi-reader multi-case (MRMC) comparative effectiveness studies.
• Results from standalone algorithm performance studies.
• Details about ground truth establishment for test or training sets, or training set sample sizes.

Therefore, I cannot fulfill your request based on the provided text.

Ask a specific question about this device