Search Filters

Search Results

Found 1 results

510(k) Data Aggregation

    K Number
    K151143
    Device Name
    EndoLIF On-Cage
    Manufacturer
    Date Cleared
    2015-07-09

    (71 days)

    Product Code
    Regulation Number
    888.3080
    Reference & Predicate Devices
    N/A
    Why did this record match?
    Device Name :

    EndoLIF On-Cage

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

    The EndoLIF® On-Cage is indicated for intervertebral body fusion procedures in skeletally mature patients with degenerative disc disease (DDD) of the lumbar spine at one or two contiguous levels from L2-S1. Degenerative disc disease is defined as discogenic back pain with degeneration of the disc confirmed by patient history and radiographic studies. These patients may also have up to Grade I spondylolisthesis at the involved level(s). These patients may have had previous non-fusion spinal surgery at the involved spinal level(s). EndoLIF® On-Cage are to be used with autogenous bone and implanted via a posterior or posterolateral approach. The EndoLIF® On-Cage is to be used with a supplemental FDA cleared fixation. Patients should have at least six (6) months of non-operative treatment prior to treatment with an EndoLIF® On-Cage.

    Device Description

    Not Found

    AI/ML Overview

    The provided document is an FDA 510(k) clearance letter for the EndoLIF On-Cage, an intervertebral body fusion device. This type of document declares substantial equivalence to a legally marketed predicate device, but it does not contain information about acceptance criteria or specific studies proving the device meets those criteria for analytical or clinical performance.

    FDA 510(k) clearances typically focus on establishing that a new device is as safe and effective as an existing, legally marketed device (predicate device). This is primarily achieved through comparisons of technological characteristics, materials, and indications for use. Performance data, while sometimes included, is not typically presented in a format that would allow for the detailed breakdown requested in your prompt (e.g., specific acceptance criteria, sample sizes, ground truth methodology for AI/software devices).

    Therefore, based solely on the provided text, I cannot describe the acceptance criteria and the study that proves the device meets them because this information is not present in this regulatory document.

    The document indicates:

    • Device Name: EndoLIF On-Cage
    • Regulation Name: Intervertebral body fusion device
    • Regulatory Class: Class II
    • Product Code: MAX
    • Indications for Use: Intervertebral body fusion procedures in skeletally mature patients with degenerative disc disease (DDD) of the lumbar spine at one or two contiguous levels from L2-S1. To be used with autogenous bone and implanted via a posterior or posterolateral approach, and with a supplemental FDA cleared fixation.

    For medical devices, especially implants like this, the "acceptance criteria" and "proof" typically involve:

    • Biocompatibility testing
    • Mechanical testing (e.g., fatigue strength, compressive strength, torsional strength) to ensure the device can withstand the forces it will experience in the body.
    • Sterilization validation
    • Bench testing comparing the new device's engineering properties to the predicate device.
    • Animal studies or cadaveric studies (less common for 510(k) if predicate comparison is strong).
    • Clinical data (often from the predicate device or a literature review, or specific clinical studies if novel features necessitate it, though not always required for 510(k) if substantial equivalence can be shown otherwise).

    However, the specific quantitative details you requested for a study proving the device meets acceptance criteria (especially involving terms like "test set," "ground truth," "MRMC," and "AI/standalone performance") are typically relevant for AI/ML-driven software as a medical device (SaMD) or diagnostic devices, which this intervertebral cage is not. The provided document is for a physical implant.

    Ask a Question

    Ask a specific question about this device

    Page 1 of 1