Search Results

Elos Accurate Hybrid Base
The Elos Accurate® Hybrid Base The intended for attaching to dental inplants in order to provide basis for dental implant and a zirconia superstructure and will be attached to the implant using a prosthetic screw and attached to the zirconia superstructure by cementing.
The Elos Accurate® Hybrid Base™ is compatible with the implant systems listed in table 1:
Table 1.
Implant Platform compatibility | Platform diameter [mm] | Implant Body diameter [mm]
Straumann BLX RB/WB | Ø3.4/Ø3.5/Ø4.5 | Ø3.5/Ø3.75/Ø4/Ø4.5/Ø5/Ø5.5/Ø6.5
The zirconia superstructures for use with the Elos Accurate® Hybrid Base "" are either intended to be sent and manufactured at a FDA registered Elos Medtech approved milling facility or to be designed and manufactured according to digital dentistry workflow system integrates multiple components of the digital dentistry workflow: scan files from Intra-Oral Scanners, CAD software, ceramic material, milling machine and associated tooling and accessories.

Elos Accurate Customized Abutment
The Elos Accurate® Customized Abutments are intended for attaching to dental implants in order to provide basis for single or multiple tooth prosthetic restorations. The Elos Accurate® Customized Abutment will be attached to a dental implant using the included Elos Prosthetic screw.
The Elos Accurate® Customized Abutment is compatible with the implant systems listed in table 1: Table 1.
Implant Platform compatibility | Platform diameter [mm] | Implant Body diameter [mm]
Straumann BLX RB/WB | Ø3.4/Ø3.5/Ø4.5 | Ø3.5/Ø3.75/Ø4/Ø4.5/Ø5/Ø5.5/Ø6.5
Astra Tech 3.0 | Ø3. | Ø3
Astra Tech EV 3.0 | Ø3 | Ø3
All digitally designed CAD/CAM customizations for the Elos Accurate® Customized Abutments are either intended to be sent and manufactured at a FDA registered Elos Medtech approved milling facility or to be designed and manufactured according to digital dentistry workflow system integrates multiple components of the digital dentistry workflow: scan files from Intra-Oral Scanners, CAD software, CAM software, milling machine and associated tooling and accessories.

The Elos Accurate® Customized Abutment and Elos Accurate® Hybrid Base™ are both patient-specific components designed for attaching to dental implants, providing a basis for single or multiple tooth prosthetic restorations.
The Elos Accurate® Customized Abutment and Elos Accurate® Hybrid Base™ will be attached to the implant using the included Elos Prosthetic Screw.
The Elos Accurate® Hybrid Base™ is a two-piece abutment composed of the pre-manufactured prosthetic component, the Hybrid Base in Titanium alloy per ASTM F136, as the bottom-half, and the zirconia superstructure as the top-half, which the laboratory/clinic is designing by use of the 510(k) cleared design software (3Shape Abutment Designer™ Software, K151455), which when assembled comprises the finished medical device. The laboratory designed superstructure is manufactured from 510(k) cleared Zirconia (Lava Plus, K011394) according to digital dentistry workflow. The laboratory designed superstructure is attached to the Elos Accurate® Hybrid Base by use of 510(k) cleared cement (Multilink Hybrid Abutment, K130436 or Panavia V5, K150704) While the Elos Accurate® Customized Abutment is a one-piece abutment which consists of an Abutment Blank used in fabricating of a full patient-specific abutment in Titanium alloy per ASTM F136. The Abutment Blank used in creation of the Elos Accurate® Customized Abutment has a pre-manufactured connection interface that fits directly to a pre-specified dental implant. The same applies to the Elos Accurate® Hybrid Base™ which fits directly to an endosseous dental implant. The customized shape of the abutment is intended to be manufactured according to a digital dentistry workflow or intended to be manufactured at an FDA registered Elos Medtech approved milling facility.
The Elos Accurate library files for both Elos Accurate® Customized Abutment and Elos Accurate® Hybrid Base™ have built-in design limitations, and the user isn't allowed to exceed these limitations as follows:
Customized Abutments: | Hybrid Base abutments (zirconia part):
Min. wall thickness 0.4 mm | Min. wall thickness 0.5 mm
Gingival height min. 0.5mm or max. 5 mm | Gingival height min. 0.5mm or max. 5 mm
Max. angulation 20° or 30°. | Max. angulation 20°.
Min. post height* 4 mm | Min. post height* 4 mm
*The post height is defined as the cementable height of the abutment.
The Elos Accurate® Customized Abutment and the Elos Accurate® Hybrid Base™ are both delivered non-sterile and the final restoration including corresponding Elos Prosthetic Screw is intended to be sterilized at the dental clinic before it is placed in the patient.

The provided text describes the submission of a 510(k) premarket notification for the "Elos Accurate® Hybrid Base™" and "Elos Accurate® Customized Abutment" dental devices. The purpose of this submission is to demonstrate that these devices are substantially equivalent to previously marketed predicate devices. The document details the indications for use, product descriptions, a comparison of technological characteristics with predicate devices, and a summary of non-clinical testing.

Here's an analysis of the acceptance criteria and the study proving device conformity:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria & Reported Device Performance

The acceptance criteria are not explicitly stated with numerical targets in the document. Instead, the document focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence to predicate devices. The "reported device performance" is primarily presented as the devices meeting the same or similar functional and safety standards as the predicate devices, with specific validations for expanded compatibility and design workflows.

The "Element of Comparison" table acts as a de facto set of acceptance criteria, where the subject device's characteristics are compared against the predicate devices, and "Substantial equivalent" is the reported "performance."

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

The document does not specify a "test set" in the context of an AI/human performance study. Instead, the testing described is primarily engineering and material characterization:

• Fatigue testing per ISO 14801: This testing involves multiple samples to assess mechanical durability. While the exact number of samples isn't given, standard ISO 14801 typically requires a significant number of samples tested to failure or for a specified number of cycles.
• Biocompatibility testing for cytotoxicity (ISO 10993-5): This testing would use biological samples or cell lines. The document states it's leveraged from previously cleared products (K230317/K231317) on "identically manufactured abutments and prosthetic screws manufactured from the same material."
• Sterilization validation (ISO 17665-1 & ISO 17665-2): Involves using Biological Indicators (BIs) or other validation methods, typically multiple cycles and samples. Leveraged from K230317/K231317.
• MRI Conditional Safety Evaluations (ASTM F2052, ASTM F2119, ASTM F2213, ASTM F2182): A "worst-case assembly" was tested, implying at least one, but possibly multiple, physical assemblies to cover various MRI conditions. Leveraged from K230317/K231317.
• Digital dentistry workflow validation: Conducted on "selected model of subject product lines," implying a representative set of designs.

Data Provenance: The data comes from non-clinical testing performed by the manufacturer (or leveraged from prior submissions by the same manufacturer, Elos Medtech Pinol A/S). The origin is Denmark (company location). The testing is prospective for the current submission but leverages retrospective data from previous clearances.

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

This information is not applicable to this submission. The device is a physical dental abutment, not an AI/diagnostic device that generates an output requiring expert interpretation for ground truth establishment. The "ground truth" for this device relates to its physical, mechanical, and biological properties, which are established through standardized engineering and laboratory tests, not expert consensus on diagnostic images.

4. Adjudication method for the test set

This is not applicable as there is no test set involving expert interpretation or a diagnostic outcome that would require adjudication.

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

This is not applicable as the device is a physical dental abutment, not an AI-assisted diagnostic tool or software.

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

This is not applicable as the device is a physical dental abutment. The "digital dentistry workflow" involves software (3Shape Abutment Designer Software) but this is used for design and manufacturing, not for standalone diagnostic performance assessment.

7. The type of ground truth used

The "ground truth" for this engineering-focused submission is established through:

• Engineering and dimensional analysis: Measurements and specifications of various components (abutments, implants, screws).
• Mechanical testing: Fatigue testing per ISO 14801 to assess durability and strength under simulated physiological loading.
• Biocompatibility testing: Standardized testing (ISO 10993-5) to confirm non-cytotoxicity.
• Sterilization validation: Standardized testing (ISO 17665-1 & ISO 17665-2) to confirm sterility.
• MRI compatibility testing: Standardized testing (ASTM F2052, ASTM F2119, ASTM F2213, ASTM F2182) to confirm MR conditional status.
• Design software validation: Testing that the software (3Shape Abutment Designer) adheres to "built-in design limitations" and prevents users from exceeding them.

8. The sample size for the training set

This is not applicable. The submission is not for an AI/machine learning device that requires a training set. The descriptions of "design limitations" and "digital dentistry workflow validation" refer to the validation of software and manufacturing processes, not the training of an algorithm in the machine learning sense.

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

This is not applicable as there is no training set for the reasons outlined above. The "design limits" mentioned for the digital dentistry workflow are predefined by Elos Medtech based on engineering principles and safety considerations for dental prosthetics.

Ask a specific question about this device

The Elos Accurate® Customized Abutments are intended for attaching to dental implants in order to provide basis for single or multiple tooth prosthetic restorations. The Elos Accurate® Customized Abutment will be attached to a dental implant using the included Elos Prosthetic screw.

The Elos Accurate® Customized Abutments are compatible with the implant systems listed in table 1:

Table 1.
| Elos Accurate Customized
Abutment - Model Type | Platform compatibility | Platform diameter
[mm] | Implant Body diameter
[mm] |
|---------------------------------------------------|-------------------------|---------------------------|-------------------------------|
| AB-NBR35 | Nobel Replace NP | 3.5 | 3.5 |
| AB-NBA30 | Nobel CC 3.0 | 3 | 3 |
| AB-NBA43 | Nobel CC RP | 3.9 | 4.3 & 5 |
| AB-NBA60 | Nobel CC WP | 5.1 | 5.5 |
| AB-SBO33 | Straumann Bone Level NC | 3.3 | 3.3 |
| AB-SBO41 | Straumann Bone Level RC | 4.1 & 4.8 | 4.1 & 4.8 |

All digitally designed CAD/CAM customizations for the Elos Accurate® Customized Abutments are only intended to be sent and manufactured at a FDA registered Elos Medtech approved milling facility.

The Elos Accurate® Customized Abutment is a patient specific abutment intended for attaching to dental implants in order to provide basis for single- or multiple tooth prosthetic restorations. The Elos Accurate® Customized Abutment will be attached to the implant using the included Elos Prosthetic Screw and attached to the crown/coping manually by cementation. The Elos Accurate® Customized Abutment consists of an Abutment Blank used in fabricating of a full patient-specific abutment in Titanium alloy per ASTM F136. The Abutment Blank used in creation of the Elos Accurate® Customized Abutment has a pre-manufactured connection interface that fits directly to a pre-specified dental implant. The customized shape of the abutment is intended to be manufactured by an Elos Medtech approved milling facility. The Elos Accurate® Customized Abutment is delivered nonsterile and the final restoration including corresponding Elos Prosthetic Screw is intended to be sterilized at the dental clinic before it is placed in the patient. The Elos Accurate® Customized Abutment provides clinicians and laboratories with a prosthetic device that can be used in definitive (permanent) single- or multi restorations.

The provided text describes the Elos Accurate® Customized Abutment, a dental device, and its FDA 510(k) clearance. This document is a regulatory submission, not a study report detailing AI/ML model performance. Therefore, many of the requested criteria related to AI/ML model evaluation are not applicable or cannot be extracted directly from this type of regulatory submission.

However, I can provide information based on the device's performance against engineering and material acceptance criteria, as well as the non-clinical testing performed to demonstrate substantial equivalence to its predicate device. This is primarily focused on mechanical and biological compatibility, not AI/driven diagnostic accuracy.

Here's the information derived from the provided text, adapted to the closest relevant categories:

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

For a device like the Elos Accurate® Customized Abutment, acceptance criteria primarily relate to mechanical properties, biocompatibility, and compatibility with implant systems. The "reported device performance" here refers to the aspects that were tested and deemed acceptable through non-clinical testing to establish substantial equivalence.

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

The document does not specify a "test set" in the context of an AI/ML model. The evaluation here is based on non-clinical testing (mechanical, dimensional, and biocompatibility).

• Sample Size: The document does not provide specific numerical sample sizes for the engineering tests (e.g., how many abutments were subjected to fatigue testing). This level of detail is typically found in the full test reports, not the 510(k) summary.
• Data Provenance: The data comes from non-clinical laboratory testing and engineering analyses performed by or for Elos Medtech Pinol A/S. The country of origin of the data is not explicitly stated, but the company is located in Denmark. The data is prospective in the sense that these tests were conducted specifically for this submission to demonstrate substantial equivalence.

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

This question is not applicable. The device is a physical dental abutment, not an AI/ML diagnostic tool requiring expert interpretation for "ground truth." Ground truth, in this context, would be established by validated measurement techniques, material science principles, and biological testing standards (e.g., ISO standards for mechanical testing and biocompatibility).

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

This is not applicable. "Adjudication method" refers to the process of resolving disagreements among human readers or experts for establishing ground truth in a diagnostic study. For this device, acceptance is based on meeting predefined engineering and biological performance standards through validated 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

This is not applicable. No MRMC study was performed as this is not an AI-assisted diagnostic device.

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

This is not applicable. This is not an AI algorithm. Its design uses CAD/CAM technology, but the clearance is for the physical abutment itself, not a diagnostic algorithm.

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

For this device, the "ground truth" or basis for acceptance relies on:

• Established engineering standards: e.g., ISO 14801 for fatigue testing of dental implants.
• Biocompatibility standards: e.g., ISO 10993-5 for cytotoxicity.
• Dimensional analysis: Verifying compatibility with specified implant systems.
• Material specifications: Conformance to Titanium Alloy 6Al-4V ELI (medical grade 5).

There is no "expert consensus" in the diagnostic sense or pathology/outcomes data used for device clearance as described in the summary.

8. The sample size for the training set

This is not applicable because there is no AI/ML model for which a "training set" would be used.

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

This is not applicable because there is no AI/ML model for which training set ground truth would be established.

Ask a specific question about this device