Search Results

The Easy Rod is a variation of the Vincer ISOLA rod of the ISOLA Spine System. This rod offers the suggeon casier contourability and casior in-site bending compared with crising V inch disneter ISOLA System consists of two subsystems: The Posterior ISOLA system and the Anarior 1501:4 System. The Easy Rod is intended to be used with the Posterior ISOLAsystem at this time.

The ISQLA implants, when used with pedicte scews, are in Grade 3 or 4 spondylolisthesis at LS-S1 utilizing and logous bone graft, having the device to the lumbar and secral spinc and intended to be removed after solid fusion is amained.

When not used with redicle screws, the ISOLA System is intended for hook, wire, and or sacrabilias screw fixation from the T1 to the ilium/secum. The non pedicle screw indications are spondylolistesis, degate (defined as discogence back pain with degencration of the disc confirmed by history and radios), deformines (scolinsis, lordosis and kyphosis), buttor, forture and previous failed surgery.

As a whole, the Posterior ISOLA spinal system is intended for T !- secral fixation. Pedicle secon fixation is from 13-S1.

The Anterior ISOLA system is intended for use in correcing schiol deformities by establishing an scially and routionally rigid firstion bridge parallel to the soinc. The Anterior system is indicated in sincations where loss of correction is expected, where scollosis cass or where pelvic obliquity is present. Spinal levels for anterior instrumentation ac from TS-L4.

Properly used, the Posterior and Anterior ISOLA Systems will provide temporary stabilization as an adjunct to spinal bone grafing processes. Specific indications are:

1. Idiopathic scoliosis.
2. Neuromuscular scoliosis kyphoscoliosis with associated paralysis or spacisticity.
3. Scollosis with deficient posterior elements such as that resulting from laminectomy or myelomeningoosle.
4. Spinal fractures (acute reduction or late deformity).
5. Degenerative disc disease (defined as discognic back pain with deperation of the discover and radiographic studies).
6. Neoplastic discase.
7. Revision surgery.

The Anterior ISOLA system is also used for the correction and stabilization of schiotic curves, for the prevence of undesired scoliotic curves, and for the stabilization of weskened trunks. Indications for these include:

1. Collapsing and unstable paralytic deformity.
2. Progressively increasing scoliosis.
3. Decreasing cardio-respiratory function, secondary to spinst or rib deformity or collapse.
4. Inability to maintain sitting balance, necessitating the use of the hands.
5. Increasing pelvic obliquity coincident with beck pain or loss of sitting balance.

The stainless steel Easy Rod is offered in 1/4 inch (6.35 mm) outer diameter and 18" (457 mm) in length. Generally, two rods are required in the construct and are cut to the appropriate length during the surgical procedure. The Easy Rod is a variation of rods previously cleared for the ISOLA Spinal System under K884163 and K944737.

The provided text describes the 510(k) summary for the AcroMed Easy Rod, a component of the ISOLA Spinal System. This document focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence to previously cleared devices rather than providing detailed performance data from a clinical study. Therefore, the information requested about acceptance criteria, device performance, and study methodology is largely not present in this regulatory filing as it would be for a clinical trial.

However, I can extract the relevant information that is available and note what is missing.

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

Missing Information:

• Specific quantitative acceptance criteria (e.g., minimum fatigue cycles, specific load limits).
• Detailed quantitative performance data for the Easy Rod (e.g., actual fatigue cycles achieved, load-to-failure values). The statement simply asserts consistency, not concrete numbers against criteria.

2. Sample size used for the test set and the data provenance (e.g. country of origin of the data, retrospective or prospective)

• Sample Size for Test Set: Not specified. The performance data section refers to "static and fatigue testing" which indicates mechanical testing, not a clinical test set with patient data.
• Data Provenance: Not applicable in the context of clinical data. This refers to mechanical testing conducted by the manufacturer, AcroMed Corporation, based in Cleveland, OH, USA.

3. Number of experts used to establish the ground truth for the test set and the qualifications of those experts (e.g. radiologist with 10 years of experience)

• Not applicable. The "performance data" refers to mechanical testing, not clinical studies requiring expert ground truth establishment.

4. Adjudication method (e.g. 2+1, 3+1, none) for the test set

• Not applicable. This pertains to clinical studies, not mechanical testing.

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

• No. This is a medical device (spinal rod) and not an AI/imaging diagnostic device. Therefore, MRMC studies are not relevant.

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

• Not applicable. This is a physical medical device, not an algorithm or AI system.

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

• Not applicable. For mechanical testing, the "ground truth" would be established by engineering standards and validated testing protocols.

8. The sample size for the training set

• Not applicable. No training set is mentioned as this device is not an AI/machine learning system.

9. How the ground truth for the training set was established

• Not applicable. No training set is mentioned.

Summary of the Study:

The "study" described in the 510(k) summary is a series of mechanical static and fatigue tests. The purpose of these tests was to demonstrate substantial equivalence of the AcroMed Easy Rod to legally marketed predicate devices. The key finding was that the Easy Rod's performance was consistent with previously cleared components, specifically AcroMed's 1/2 inch diameter ISOLA rod (K944737) and the historical Harrington System. This is a common approach for spinal fixation device 510(k) clearances, where mechanical performance equivalence is used to establish safety and effectiveness without requiring new clinical trials, given the predicate device's established clinical history.

Ask a specific question about this device