Search Results

The Branchor Balloon Guide Catheter is indicated for use to facilitate the insertion and guidance of an intravasular catheter into a selected blood vessel in the neuro vasculature, and injection of contrast media.

The balloon provides temporary vascular occlusion during these procedures.

The Branchor Balloon Guide Catheter can also be used as a conduit for retrieval devices.

The Branchor Balloon Guide Catheter has the same design, materials and accessories as the predicate device (K203723). The change to the subject device includes performance testing and labeling to allow use with a power injector.

This balloon guide catheter is a variable stiffness catheter that has a radiopaque marker at the distal end of the balloon and a branched connector at the proximal end, and is equipped with a braid reinforced coaxial lumen. A balloon is attached to the distal end, and the dimensions of this balloon guide catheter and the recommended balloon injection volume are indicated on the product label. The balloon quide catheter is provided sterile, using ethylene oxide, and is intended for single use only by physicians who have been adequately trained in neurointerventional procedures.

The outer surface of this balloon quide catheter is coated with a hydrophilic coating in order to enhance lubricity when the surface is wet. The shaft lumen is provided with PTFE coating, except the connector part, to facilitate the passage of the quidewire and other devices through the section.

This is a 510(k) Pre-Market Notification submission for a medical device, which focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence to a predicate device. It is not an AI/ML device, and therefore the concepts of "acceptance criteria for an AI device," "experts used to establish ground truth," "adjudication methods," "MRMC studies," "standalone performance," or "training set" are not applicable in the context of this document.

The document describes non-clinical bench testing for the Branchor Balloon Guide Catheter to support its use with power injectors. The acceptance criteria and the study are as follows:

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

Since this is a substantial equivalence submission for a non-AI device, the "acceptance criteria" here refer to the performance standards met during non-clinical bench testing. The document states that the device "met all acceptance criteria" without explicitly listing numerical thresholds for each test. However, it reports a general "Pass" for each test.

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

• Sample Size: The document does not specify the exact number of devices tested for each non-clinical bench test (Burst Pressure, Power Injection, Flow Rate). It refers to "non-aged and aged devices" being tested, implying multiple units were used.
• Data Provenance: The tests were "non-clinical bench testing," meaning they were conducted in a laboratory setting. The country of origin of the data is not specified, but the applicant is ASAHI INTECC CO., LTD from Japan, with ASAHI INTECC USA, Inc. as the primary contact. The tests are prospective in nature, as they assess the performance of the manufactured device.

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

Not applicable. This is a non-clinical bench study for a medical device, not a study involving ground truth established by human experts.

4. Adjudication method for the test set:

Not applicable. There is no adjudication method as this is not a study assessing interpretations or diagnoses.

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 a non-AI medical device; therefore, MRMC studies and human reader improvement with AI assistance are irrelevant.

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

Not applicable. This is a non-AI medical device.

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

For this type of device, "ground truth" is established by direct physical measurements and observations of the device's mechanical and functional performance under specified test conditions in a laboratory setting, rather than clinical outcomes or expert consensus. For example:

• Burst Pressure: Ground truth is the physical bursting pressure measured.
• Power Injection: Ground truth is the device's ability to withstand the forces and pressures of power injection without failure and maintain patency for flow.
• Flow Rate: Ground truth is the measured flow rate through the device.

8. The sample size for the training set:

Not applicable. This is not an AI/ML device and does not involve a training set.

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 Branchor Balloon Guide Catheter is indicated for use to facilitate the insertion and guidance of an intravascular catheter into a selected blood vessel in the neuro vasculature, and injection of contrast media.

The balloon provides temporary vascular occlusion during these procedures.

The Branchor Balloon Guide Catheter can also be used as a conduit for retrieval devices.

This balloon guide catheter is a variable stiffness catheter that has a radio-opaque marker at the distal end of the balloon and a branched connector at the proximal end, and is equipped with a braid reinforced coaxial lumen. A balloon is attached to the distal end, and the dimensions of this balloon guide catheter and the recommended balloon injection volume are indicated on the product label. The balloon guide catheter is provided sterile, using ethylene oxide, and is intended for single use only by physicians who have been adequately trained in neurointerventional procedures.

The outer surface of this balloon guide catheter is coated with a hydrophilic coating in order to enhance lubricity when the surface is wet. The shaft lumen is provided with PTFE coating, except the connector part, to facilitate the passage of the guidewire and other devices through the section.

Here's a breakdown of the acceptance criteria and study information based on the provided text, focusing on what is present and noting what is not mentioned:

It's important to note that this document is a 510(k) premarket notification, which demonstrates substantial equivalence to existing devices, usually through non-clinical bench testing. It is not typically a clinical study involving human patients or complex AI performance metrics like those for image analysis.

Acceptance Criteria and Device Performance

This submission is for a medical device (Balloon Guide Catheter), not an AI/ML imaging device. As such, the "reported device performance" refers to the results of non-clinical bench testing, which are primarily pass/fail against engineering and design specifications.

Biocompatibility Testing

Study Details (Applicable to Non-Clinical Bench Testing)

1. Sample Size Used for the Test Set and Data Provenance:

   • Test Set Sample Size: Not explicitly stated for each test, but standard engineering testing involves sufficient samples to achieve statistical confidence for each specific test (e.g., multiple units for burst pressure, tensile strength, etc.).
   • Data Provenance: The submission is from "ASAHI INTECC CO., LTD" in "Aichi 489-0071, Japan". This indicates the testing was conducted by or on behalf of the manufacturer, likely in Japan or a contracted laboratory. The nature of these tests (bench tests) means they are not "retrospective or prospective" in the sense of patient data.

2. Number of Experts Used to Establish Ground Truth for the Test Set and Qualifications:

   • This is a non-clinical device performance study (bench testing), not a study assessing AI performance or diagnostic accuracy. Therefore, "experts" in the context of establishing ground truth for data interpretation (like radiologists for image analysis) are not applicable. The "ground truth" for these tests is defined by engineering specifications and standards (e.g., how much pressure a balloon should withstand).

3. Adjudication Method for the Test Set:

   • Not applicable. Adjudication methods (like 2+1 voting) are used in clinical studies or studies where human interpretation of complex data (like medical images) is involved. Bench tests have objective pass/fail criteria based on measured physical properties.

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:

   • No. This is not an AI/ML imaging device and thus no MRMC study was conducted.

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

   • No. This is not an AI/ML device.

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

   • For the non-clinical tests, the "ground truth" is based on engineering specifications, recognized industry standards (e.g., ISO), and physical measurements designed to ensure the device meets its intended performance characteristics and safety profile.

7. The sample size for the training set:

   • Not applicable. This is not an AI/ML device, so there is no "training set."

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

   • Not applicable. There is no training set for this type of device submission.

Ask a specific question about this device