Search Results

The Eminent Spine 3D Titanium Pedicle Screw System is designed to provide immobilization and stabilization to the thoracic, lumbar and sacral spinal segments as an adjunct to fusion. The system is intended for posterior, pedicle fixation in skeletally mature patients for the treatment of the following acute and chronic instabilities or deformities: severe spondylolisthesis (grades 3 or 4) of the L5-S1 vertebrae, degenerative spondylolisthesis with objective evidence of neurologic impairment, fracture, dislocation, spinal stenosis, scoliosis, kyphosis, lordosis, spinal tumor, pseudoarthrosis and failed previous fusion.

The Eminent Spine 3D Titanium Pedicle Screw System consists of rods, polyaxial screws with set caps, and cross connectors with lock screws. Rods are 5.5mm in diameter and are available either straight or pre-contoured. Straight and pre-contoured rods are each offered in lengths ranging from 40mm to 600mm in various increments. The radius of curvature of the pre-contoured rods is 154mm throughout the entire series. Cannulated polyaxial screws are available in 6.0mm, 6.5mm, 7.0mm, 7.5mm, and 8.0mm diameters and in lengths ranging from 40mm to 60mm in 5mm increments. Set caps are used to fasten the rod and screw. Cross connectors are available in 3 length ranges: 32mm-42mm, 42mm-58mm, and 58mm-74mm. Cross connectors lock screws are used to fasten the cross connector together and fasten across the rods.

All components are manufactured from Ti6Al4V ELI. The screw is made specifically from Ti6Al4V ELI per ASTM F3001 and the tulip, set cap, rod, and cross link systems are made specifically from Ti6Al4V ELI per ASTM F136. The devices are sold non-sterile.

The provided document is an FDA 510(k) clearance letter for a medical device, the "Eminent Spine 3D Titanium Pedicle Screw System." This letter is a regulatory document, not a clinical study report.

Therefore, none of the information requested about acceptance criteria and study proving device performance (points 1-9) can be found in this document.

The document states that the device is "substantially equivalent" to legally marketed predicate devices, which is the basis for 510(k) clearance. This equivalence is primarily demonstrated through mechanical testing (listed on page 6) and comparison of technological characteristics (page 6), rather than clinical performance studies involving human subjects or AI algorithms.

Specifically, the document mentions:

• Mechanical Testing:
  • Static torsion, static compression bending, and dynamic compression bending according to ASTM F1717
  • Torsional strength, driving torque, and axial pullout according to ASTM F543
  • Static cantilever bending according to ASTM F2193
  • Dynamic cantilever bending modified from ASTM F2193
• Conclusion: "The results support the substantial equivalence of the subject device compared to predicate devices."

This type of submission typically relies on non-clinical data (e.g., bench testing) to demonstrate that the new device performs as safely and effectively as a legally marketed predicate device, and does not usually include the detailed clinical study data points requested (such as sample size for test/training sets, expert adjudication, MRMC studies, or AI algorithm performance).

In summary, the provided text does not contain the information necessary to address the specific questions about acceptance criteria and clinical study performance for human readers or AI, as it pertains to a mechanical medical device cleared through substantial equivalence based on bench testing.

Ask a specific question about this device