LogoFDA 510(k) Search
Search Filters

Search Results

Found 1 results

510(k) Data Aggregation

    K Number
    K993514
    Device Name
    DEFINITE
    Manufacturer
    DEGUSSA - NEY DENTAL, INC.
    Date Cleared
    2000-02-24

    (129 days)

    Product Code
    EBF
    Regulation Number
    872.3690
    Type
    Traditional
    Panel
    Dental
    Reference & Predicate Devices
    N/A
    Why did this record match?
    Device Name :

    DEFINITE

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

    Definite® is a light cured composite intended to be used for all classes of restorations from class I to class V.

    Device Description

    Definite® is a light cured composite offered as a single paste system in compules. The system consists of the filling material Definite® and the self etching adhesive Etch&Prime® 3.0.

    AI/ML Overview

    The provided FDA document (K993514) is a 510(k) clearance letter for a dental restorative material called "Definite®". It is a premarket notification, not a clinical study report. Therefore, it does not contain any information about acceptance criteria, device performance, sample sizes, ground truth establishment, expert qualifications, or comparative effectiveness studies.

    The document only states that the device is "substantially equivalent" to legally marketed predicate devices for use in "all classes of restorations from class I to class V." This substantial equivalence determination is based on the comparison to predicate devices, not on a new clinical study detailed in this specific document.

    To answer the requested questions, one would need access to the full 510(k) submission, which is typically not publicly available in this level of detail, or reference a separate clinical study report, if one was conducted and made public.

    Therefore, based solely on the provided document, I cannot provide information for the following:

    1. A table of acceptance criteria and the reported device performance: Not present.
    2. Sample sizes used for the test set and the data provenance: Not present.
    3. Number of experts used to establish the ground truth for the test set and the qualifications of those experts: Not present.
    4. Adjudication method for the test set: Not present.
    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 present. This device is a dental restorative material, not an AI-assisted diagnostic tool.
    6. If a standalone (i.e. algorithm only without human-in-the-loop performance) was done: Not present. This device is a dental restorative material.
    7. The type of ground truth used: Not present.
    8. The sample size for the training set: Not present.
    9. How the ground truth for the training set was established: Not present.
    Ask a Question

    Ask a specific question about this device

    Page 1 of 1