Search Filters

Search Results

Found 1 results

510(k) Data Aggregation

    K Number
    K090909
    Date Cleared
    2009-06-04

    (64 days)

    Product Code
    Regulation Number
    878.3300
    Reference & Predicate Devices
    N/A
    Why did this record match?
    Device Name :

    C-QUR V -PATCH MESH

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

    Atrium C-QUR V-Patch™ Mesh is indicated for use in hernia repair, chest wall reconstruction, traumatic or surgical wounds and other fascial surgical intervention procedures requiring reinforcement with a nonabsorbable supportive material.

    Device Description

    Not Found

    AI/ML Overview

    The provided document is a 510(k) clearance letter from the FDA for a surgical mesh device, the "Atrium C-QUR V-Patch™ Mesh". It confirms that the device is substantially equivalent to legally marketed predicate devices.

    This type of document does not contain information about acceptance criteria, device performance studies, sample sizes, expert qualifications, ground truth establishment, or any of the other specific details requested in your prompt regarding artificial intelligence or device performance compared to specific metrics.

    The 510(k) process for a Class II device like surgical mesh typically relies on demonstrating substantial equivalence to a predicate device through evidence such as:

    • Similar materials
    • Similar design
    • Similar manufacturing process
    • Similar intended use
    • Performance data (e.g., mechanical testing, biocompatibility in animal models) demonstrating the new device performs as safely and effectively as the predicate.

    However, the provided text does not contain any of these specific study details or acceptance criteria tables. It is a regulatory clearance letter, not a study report or a summary of performance data.

    Therefore, I cannot provide the requested information from the provided input regarding:

    1. A table of acceptance criteria and the reported device performance
    2. Sample sizes used for the test set and data provenance
    3. Number of experts and their qualifications
    4. Adjudication method
    5. MRMC comparative effectiveness study results
    6. Standalone performance results
    7. Type of ground truth used
    8. Sample size for the training set
    9. How ground truth for the training set was established
    Ask a Question

    Ask a specific question about this device

    Page 1 of 1