Search Results

Ask a specific question about this device

The Venue, Venue Go, Venue Fit and Venue Sprint are general purpose diagnostic ultrasound systems for use by qualified and trained healthcare professionals or practitioners that are legally authorized or licensed by law in the country, state or other local municipality in which he or she practices, for ultrasound imaging, measurement, display and analysis of the human body and fluid. The users may or may not be working under supervision or authority of a physician. Users may also include medical students working under the supervision or authority of a physician during their education / training.

Venue, Venue Go and Venue Fit are intended to be used in a hospital or medical clinic. Venue, Venue Go and Venue Fit clinical applications include: abdominal (GYN and Urology), thoracic/pleural, ophthalmic, Fetal/OB, Small Organ (including breast, testes, thyroid), Vascular/Peripheral vascular, neonatal and adult cephalic, pediatric, musculoskeletal (conventional and superficial), cardiac (adults and pediatric), Transrectal, Transvaginal, Transesophageal, Intraoperative (vascular) and interventional guidance (includes tissue biopsy, fluid drainage, vascular and non-vascular access). Modes of operation include: B, M, PW Doppler, CW Doppler, Color Doppler, Color M Doppler, Power Doppler, Harmonic Imaging, Coded Pulse and Combined modes: B/M, B/Color M, B/PWD, B/Color/PWD, B/Power/PWD, B/CWD, B/Color/CWD.

The Venue Sprint is intended to be used in a hospital, medical clinic, home environment and road/air ambulance. Venue Sprint clinical applications include: abdominal (GYN and Urology), thoracic/pleural, ophthalmic, Fetal/OB, Small Organ (including breast, testes, thyroid), Vascular/Peripheral vascular, neonatal and adult cephalic, pediatric, musculoskeletal (conventional and superficial), cardiac (adults and pediatric, 40 kg and above) and interventional guidance (includes free hand tissue biopsy, fluid drainage, vascular and non-vascular access). Modes of operation include: B, M, PW Doppler, Color Doppler and Harmonic Imaging.

Venue, Venue Go, Venue Fit and Venue Sprint are general-purpose diagnostic ultrasound systems intended for use by qualified and trained healthcare professionals to evaluate the body by ultrasound imaging and fluid flow analysis.

The systems utilize a variety of linear, convex, and phased array transducers which provide high imaging capability, supporting all standard acquisition modes.

The systems have a small footprint that easily fits into tight spaces and positioned to accommodate the sometimes-awkward work settings of the point of care user.

The Venue is a mobile system, the Venue Go and Venue Fit are compact, portable systems that can be hand carried using an integrated handle, placed on a horizontal surface, attached to a mobile cart or mounted on the wall. Venue, Venue Go and Venue Fit have a high-resolution color LCD monitor, with a simple, multi-touch user interface that makes the systems intuitive.

The Venue Sprint is used together with the Vscan Air probes and provides the user interface for control of the probes and the needed software functionality for analysis of the ultrasound images and saving/storage of the related images and videos.

The Venue, Venue Go, Venue Fit and Venue Sprint systems can be powered through an electrical wall outlet for long term use or from an internal battery for a short time with full functionality and scanning. A barcode reader and RFID scanner are available as additional input devices. The systems meet DICOM requirements to support users image storage and archiving needs and allows for output to printing devices.

The Venue, Venue Go and Venue Fit systems are capable of displaying the patient's ECG trace synchronized to the scanned image. This allows the user to view an image from a specific time of the ECG signal which is used as an input for gating during scanning. The ECG signal can be input directly from the patient or as an output from an ECG monitoring device. ECG information is not intended for monitoring or diagnosis. Compatible biopsy kits can be used for needle-guidance procedures.

The provided document, a 510(k) Clearance Letter and Submission Summary, primarily focuses on the substantial equivalence of the GE Healthcare Venue series of diagnostic ultrasound systems to previously cleared predicate devices. It specifically details the "Auto Bladder Volume (ABV)" feature as an AI-powered component and provides a summary of its testing.

Here's a breakdown of the acceptance criteria and the study proving the device meets them, based only on the provided text:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance (for Auto Bladder Volume - ABV)

2. Sample Size Used for the Test Set and Data Provenance

• Test Set (Verification Dataset) Sample Size: 1874 images from 101 individuals.
• Data Provenance:
  • Country of Origin: USA and Israel.
  • Retrospective or Prospective: Not explicitly stated as either retrospective or prospective. However, the description of "data collected from several different Console variants" for training and verification suggests pre-existing data, which often leans towards a retrospective collection.

3. Number of Experts Used to Establish Ground Truth for the Test Set and Qualifications

• Number of Experts: Not explicitly stated. The document refers to "annotators" who performed manual annotation.
• Qualifications of Experts: Not explicitly stated. The annotators are described as performing "manual annotation," implying they are skilled in this task, but specific qualifications (e.g., radiologists, sonographers, years of experience) are not provided.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set

• Adjudication Method: Not explicitly stated. The document mentions "annotators performed manual annotation," but does not detail if multiple annotators were used for each case or any specific adjudication process (e.g., 2+1, 3+1 consensus).

5. Multi-Reader Multi-Case (MRMC) Comparative Effectiveness Study

• Was an MRMC study done? No. The document states: "The subjects of this premarket submission, Venue, Venue Go, Venue Fit and Venue Sprint, did not require clinical studies to support substantial equivalence." The testing described for ABV is a standalone algorithm performance validation against established ground truth, not a comparative human-AI study.
• Effect Size of Human Readers Improvement: Not applicable, as no MRMC study was performed.

6. Standalone (Algorithm Only) Performance Study

• Was a standalone study done? Yes. The "AI Summary of Testing" section describes a study for the Auto Bladder Volume (ABV) feature, which assesses the algorithm's "automatic caliper placement success rate" against manually established ground truth. This is a standalone performance evaluation of the algorithm.

7. Type of Ground Truth Used (for ABV Test Set)

• Ground Truth Type: Expert consensus/manual annotation. The document states: "Ground truth annotations of the verification dataset were obtained as follows: In all Training/Validation and Verification datasets, annotators performed manual annotation on images converted from DICOM files." They identified "landmarks, which represent the bladder edges," corresponding to standard measurement locations.

8. Sample Size for the Training Set (for ABV)

• Training Set Sample Size: Total dataset included 8,392 images from 496 individuals. Of these, 1,874 were used for the verification dataset, and "the rest" were used for training/validation. This implies the training/validation set would be 8392 - 1874 = 6518 images from the remaining individuals not included in the verification set.

9. How the Ground Truth for the Training Set Was Established (for ABV)

• Ground Truth Establishment: Similar to the verification dataset, "annotators performed manual annotation on images converted from DICOM files" for both Training/Validation and Verification datasets. They chose "4-6 images that represent different bladder volume status" for each individual and annotated "4 different landmarks" per view (transverse and longitudinal) representing bladder edges.

Ask a specific question about this device

The MAGNETOM system is indicated for use as a magnetic resonance diagnostic device (MRDD) that produces transverse, sagittal, coronal and oblique cross sectional images, spectroscopic images and/or spectra, and that displays the internal structure and/or function of the head, body, or extremities. Other physical parameters derived from the images and/or spectra may also be produced. Depending on the region of interest, contrast agents may be used. These images and/or spectra and the physical parameters derived from the images and/or spectra when interpreted by a trained physician yield information that may assist in diagnosis.

The MAGNETOM system may also be used for imaging during interventional procedures when performed with MR compatible devices such as in-room displays and MR Safe biopsy needles.

The subject device, MAGNETOM Avanto Fit with software syngo MR XA70A, consists of new and modified software and hardware that is similar to what is currently offered on the predicate device, MAGNETOM Avanto Fit with syngo MR XA50A (K220151).

A high-level summary of the new and modified hardware and software is provided below:

For MAGNETOM Avanto Fit with syngo MR XA70:

Hardware

New Hardware:
myExam 3D Camera
BM Head/Neck 20

Modified Hardware:
Sanaflex (cushions for patient positioning)

Software

New Features and Applications:
myExam Autopilot Brain
myExam Autopilot Knee
3D Whole Heart
HASTE_interactive
GRE_PC
Open Recon
Deep Resolve Gain
Fleet Reference Scan
Physio logging
complex averaging
AutoMate Cardiac
Ghost Reduction
BLADE diffusion
Beat Sensor
Deep Resolve Sharp
Deep Resolve Boost and Deep Resolve Boost (TSE)
Deep Resolve Boost HASTE
Deep Resolve Boost EPI Diffusion

Modified Features and Applications:
SPACE improvement (high band)
SPACE improvement (incr grad)
Brain Assist
Eco power mode
myExam Angio Advanced Assist (Test Bolus)

The subject device, MAGNETOM Skyra Fit with software syngo MR XA70A, consists of new and modified software and hardware that is similar to what is currently offered on the predicate device, MAGNETOM Skyra Fit with syngo MR XA50A (K220589).

A high-level summary of the new and modified hardware and software is provided below:

For MAGNETOM Skyra Fit with syngo MR XA70:

Hardware

New Hardware:
myExam 3D Camera

Modified Hardware:
Sanaflex (cushions for patient positioning)

Software

New Features and Applications:
Beat Sensor
HASTE_interactive
GRE_PC
3D Whole Heart
Deep Resolve Gain
Open Recon
Ghost Reduction
Fleet Reference Scan
BLADE diffusion
HASTE diffusion
Physio logging
complex averaging
Deep Resolve Swift Brain
Deep Resolve Sharp
Deep Resolve Boost and Deep Resolve Boost (TSE)
Deep Resolve Boost HASTE
Deep Resolve Boost EPI Diffusion
AutoMate Cardiac
SVS_EDIT

Modified Features and Applications:
SPACE improvement (high band)
SPACE improvement (incr grad)
Brain Assist
Eco power mode
myExam Angio Advanced Assist (Test Bolus)

The subject device, MAGNETOM Sola Fit with software syngo MR XA70A, consists of new and modified software and hardware that is similar to what is currently offered on the predicate device, MAGNETOM Sola Fit with syngo MR XA51A (K221733).

A high-level summary of the new and modified hardware and software is provided below:

For MAGNETOM Sola Fit with syngo MR XA70:

Hardware

New Hardware:
myExam 3D Camera

Modified Hardware:
Sanaflex (cushions for patient positioning)

Software

New Features and Applications:
GRE_PC
3D Whole Heart
Ghost Reduction
Fleet Reference Scan
BLADE diffusion
Physio logging
Open Recon
Complex averaging
Deep Resolve Sharp
Deep Resolve Boost and Deep Resolve Boost (TSE)
Deep Resolve Boost HASTE
Deep Resolve Boost EPI Diffusion
AutoMate Cardiac
Implant suite

Modified Features and Applications:
SPACE improvement (high band)
SPACE improvement (incr grad)
Brain Assist
Eco power mode

The subject device, MAGNETOM Viato.Mobile with software syngo MR XA70A, consists of new and modified software and hardware that is similar to what is currently offered on the predicate device, MAGNETOM Viato.Mobile with syngo MR XA51A (K240608).

A high-level summary of the new and modified hardware and software is provided below:

For MAGNETOM Viato.Mobile with syngo MR XA70:

Hardware

New Hardware:
n.a.

Modified Hardware:
Sanaflex (cushions for patient positioning)

Software

New Features and Applications:
GRE_PC
3D Whole Heart
Ghost Reduction
Fleet Reference Scan
BLADE diffusion
Physio logging
Open Recon
Complex averaging
Deep Resolve Sharp
Deep Resolve Boost and Deep Resolve Boost (TSE)
Deep Resolve Boost HASTE
Deep Resolve Boost EPI Diffusion
AutoMate Cardiac
Implant suite

Modified Features and Applications:
SPACE improvement (high band)
SPACE improvement (incr grad)
Brain Assist
Eco power mode

Furthermore, the following minor updates and changes were conducted for the subject devices:

Low SAR Protocol minor update (for all subject devices but MAGNETOM Skyra Fit): the goal of the SAR adaptive protocols was to be able to perform knee, spine, heart and brain examinations with 50% of the max allowed SAR values in normal mode for head and whole-body SAR. The SAR reduction was achieved by parameter adaptations like Flip angle, TR, RF Pulse Type, Turbo Factor, concatenations. For cardiac clinically accepted alternative imaging contrasts are used (submitted with K232494).

Implementation of image sorting prepare for PACS (submitted with K231560).

Implementation of improved DICOM color support (submitted with K232494).

Needle intervention AddIn was added all subject device (submitted with K232494).

Inline Image Filter switchable for users: in the subject device, users have the ability to switch the "Inline image filter" (implicite Filter) on or off. This filter is an image-based filter that can be applied to specific pulse sequence types. The function of the filter remains unchanged from the previous device MAGNETOM Sola with syngo MR XA61A (K232535).

SVS_EDIT is newly added for MAGNETOM Skyra Fit, but without any changes (submitted with K203443)

Brain Assist received an improvement and is identical to that of snygo MR XA61A (K232535)

Open Recon is introduced for all systems. The function of Open Recon remains unchanged from the previous submissions (submitted with K221733).

Lock TR and FA in Bold received a minor UI update

Implant Suite is newly introduced for MAGNETOM Sola Fit and MAGNETOM Viato.Mobile, but without any changes (submitted with K232535)

myExam Autopilot Brain and myExam Autopilot Knee are newly introduced for the subject device MAGNETOM AVANTO Fit and are unchanged from previous submissions (submitted with K221733).

myExam Angio Advanced Assist (Test Bolus) received a bug fixing and minimal UI improvements.

The provided text is an FDA 510(k) clearance letter for various MAGNETOM MRI Systems. While it details new and modified software and hardware features, it does not include specific acceptance criteria or a study that "proves the device meets the acceptance criteria" in terms of performance metrics like sensitivity, specificity, or accuracy for a diagnostic task.

Instead, the document focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence to predicate devices. This is achieved by:

• Stating that the indications for use are the same.
• Listing numerous predicate and reference devices.
• Detailing hardware and software changes.
• Mentioning non-clinical tests like software verification and validation, sample clinical images, and image quality assessment to show that the new features maintain an "equivalent safety and performance profile" to the predicate devices.
• Referencing scientific publications for certain features to support their underlying principles and utility.
• Briefly describing the training and validation data for two AI features: Deep Resolve Boost and Deep Resolve Sharp, but without performance acceptance criteria or detailed results.

Therefore, much of the requested information cannot be extracted from this document because it is not a study report detailing clinical performance against predefined acceptance criteria for a specific diagnostic outcome.

However, I can extract the information related to the AI features as best as possible from the "AI Features/Applications training and validation" section (Page 16).

Acceptance Criteria and Study Details (Limited to AI Features)

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

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

• Deep Resolve Boost:
  • Test Set Sample Size: Not explicitly stated as a separate "test set" size. The document mentions "training and validation data" for over 25,000 TSE slices, over 10,000 HASTE slices (for refinement), and over 1,000,000 EPI Diffusion slices. It's unclear what proportion of this was used specifically for final testing, or if the "validation" mentioned includes the final performance evaluation.
  • Data Provenance: Retrospective, described as "Input data was retrospectively created from the ground truth by data manipulation and augmentation." Country of origin is not specified.
• Deep Resolve Sharp:
  • Test Set Sample Size: Not explicitly stated as a separate "test set" size. The document mentions "training and validation" on more than 10,000 high resolution 2D images. Similar to Deep Resolve Boost, it's unclear what proportion was specifically for final testing.
  • Data Provenance: Retrospective, described as "Input data was retrospectively created from the ground truth by data manipulation." Country of origin is not specified.

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

This information is not provided in the document. The definition of "ground truth" for the AI features refers to the acquired datasets themselves rather than expert-labeled annotations. Visual comparisons are mentioned as part of the evaluation, but without details on expert involvement or qualifications.

4. Adjudication method for the test set

This information is not provided in the document. While "visual comparisons" and "visual rating" are mentioned, no specific adjudication method (e.g., 2+1, 3+1) is described.

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, a MRMC comparative effectiveness study demonstrating human reader improvement with AI assistance is not described in this document. The focus of the AI features (Deep Resolve Boost and Deep Resolve Sharp) is on image quality enhancement (denoising, sharpness) and reconstruction rather than assisting human readers in a diagnostic task that can be quantified by an effect size.

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

Yes, the evaluation of Deep Resolve Boost and Deep Resolve Sharp, based on metrics like PSNR, SSIM, and perceptual loss, and "visual comparisons" or "visual rating" appears to be an assessment of the algorithm's performance in enhancing image quality in a standalone capacity, without direct human-in-the-loop interaction for diagnosis.

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

• Deep Resolve Boost: "The acquired datasets (as described above) represent the ground truth for the training and validation." This implies the original, full-quality, unaltered MRI scan data. Further, "Input data was retrospectively created from the ground truth by data manipulation and augmentation. This process includes further under-sampling of the data by discarding k-space lines, lowering of the SNR level by addition Restricted of noise and mirroring of k-space data."
• Deep Resolve Sharp: "The acquired datasets represent the ground truth for the training and validation." Similar to Boost, this refers to original, high-resolution MRI scan data. For training, "k-space data has been cropped such that only the center part of the data was used as input. With this method corresponding low-resolution data as input and high-resolution data as output / ground truth were created for training and validation."

8. The sample size for the training set

• Deep Resolve Boost:
  • TSE: more than 25,000 slices
  • HASTE (for refinement): more than 10,000 HASTE slices
  • EPI Diffusion: more than 1,000,000 slices
• Deep Resolve Sharp: more than 10,000 high resolution 2D images.

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

• Deep Resolve Boost: The ground truth was established by the "acquired datasets" themselves (full-quality MRI scans). The training input data was then derived from this ground truth by simulating degraded images (e.g., under-sampling, adding noise).
• Deep Resolve Sharp: Similarly, the ground truth was the "acquired datasets" (high-resolution MRI scans). The training input data was derived by cropping k-space data to create corresponding low-resolution inputs.

Ask a specific question about this device

The Cochlear Baha 7 Sound Processor is intended for the following patients and indications for use:

• Patient of any age for use with the Baha SoundBand, Baha Softband (or headband) or Baha SoundArc. Patients aged 5 and older for use with the Baha auditory osseointegrated implant system.
• Patients who have a conductive or mixed hearing loss and can still benefit from sound amplification. The pure tone average bone-conduction hearing threshold (measured at 0.5, 1, 2, and 3kHz) should be better than or equal to 55 dB HL.
• Bilateral fitting is intended for patients who meet the above criterion in both ears, with bilaterally symmetric moderate to severe conductive or mixed hearing loss. Symmetrical bone-conduction thresholds are defined as less than a 10 dB average difference between ears (measured at 0.5, 1, 2, and 3 kHz), or less than a 15 dB difference at individual frequencies.
• Patients who suffer from unilateral sensorineural deafness in one ear with normal hearing in the other ear (i.e. Single-sided deadness: SSD). Normal hearing is defined as a pure tone average air-conduction hearing threshold (measured at 0.5, 1, 2, and 3 kHz) of better than or equal to 20 dB HL.
• Baha for SSD is also indicated for any patient who is indicated for an air-conduction contralateral routing of signals (AC CROS) hearing aid, but who for some reason cannot or will not use an AC CROS.

The Cochlear Baha bone conduction hearing system provides an alternate solution for patients who may not benefit from air-conduction hearing aids. Unlike air-conduction hearing aids, the Baha implant system utilizes a natural bone conduction pathway to send sound directly to the inner ear (cochlea), bypassing a damaged outer or middle ear. The Baha bone conduction hearing system has non-surgical and surgical options. For the non-surgical option, the external sound processor, which converts acoustic sound into mechanical vibrations, is securely placed behind the ear with a Baha SoundBand, Baha Softband, or Baha SoundArc. For the surgical option, the external sound processor is coupled with an abutment (Baha Connect) or magnet (Baha Attract). The mechanical vibrations travel through the abutment or magnet to a small, titanium implant, which is surgically placed into the bone. The titanium implant has an osseointegrated bond with the surrounding bone, allowing transmission of high-quality sound directly to the inner ear.

The Baha 7 Sound Processor is a firmware variant of the previously cleared Baha 6 Max Sound Processor (K202048). The changes introduced in this 510(k) are specific to the sound processor and accessories, and do not affect the cleared Baha Connect abutments, Baha Attract magnet, the BI300 titanium implant, Baha Softband, or Baha SoundArc. The Baha 7 Sound Processor does not modify the intended functionality or fundamental operating principles of the bone conduction hearing system. The changes within culminate as the next generation Baha sound processor that supports Bluetooth LE Audio streaming, which enables compatibility with the new generation wireless accessories from GN Hearing.

The Baha 7 Sound Processor will be supported by a new fitting software (Baha Fitting Software 7), an updated app (Baha Smart App), and a new non-surgical retention option (Baha SoundBand).

The provided text describes a 510(k) premarket notification for the Cochlear Baha 7 Sound Processor. It focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence to a predicate device, the Baha 6 Max Sound Processor. While it mentions various types of testing conducted (biocompatibility, software, electromagnetic compatibility, and bench testing), it does not include specific acceptance criteria or detailed study results for device performance in the format requested.

The document primarily provides:

• A summary of the device and its components (Baha 7 Sound Processor, Baha Fitting Software 7, Baha Smart App, Baha SoundBand).
• Indications for Use.
• A comparison table (Table 1, 2, 3, 4) detailing similarities and differences between the new device and the predicate(s).
• A general statement about performance data: "The testing demonstrated that the software supported the clinician fitting and recipient control of the Baha 7 Sound Processor." and "The bench testing demonstrates that the Baha 7 SP does not result in additional safety or efficacy concerns in comparison to the predicate." and "The results demonstrated the Baha 7 Sound Processor is functionally equivalent to the Baha 6 Max Sound Processor."

Therefore, based on the provided text, it is not possible to fully answer your request regarding specific acceptance criteria, reported device performance in a table, sample sizes, ground truth establishment details, or MRMC study results because this information is not present in the excerpt. The document focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence through feature comparison and general statements about testing, rather than presenting a performance study with quantitative acceptance criteria and results.

Here's what can be inferred or stated based on the provided text, and what is missing:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance:

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

• Not specified. The document mentions "bench functionality and performance testing" and "software testing" but provides no details on the sample size of devices or the data used for these tests.
• Data Provenance: Not specified for any performance testing.

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

• N/A. This type of information is typically relevant for studies involving human assessment (e.g., diagnostic accuracy studies for AI in imaging). As the device is a hearing aid sound processor, and the submission focuses on functional equivalence, there is no mention of "ground truth" adjudicated by experts in this context within the provided text. The "ground truth" for the device's function would be its measured physical characteristics and software performance against specifications.

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

• N/A. Not applicable given the nature of the device and the type of information presented. Adjudication methods are typically used in clinical studies or AI performance evaluations where human interpretation or consensus is required to establish a definitive ground truth.

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, an MRMC study was not done or is not reported here. This type of study is primarily relevant for AI-powered diagnostic aids where human readers interpret medical images or data. The Baha 7 Sound Processor is a hearing aid sound processor, not an AI diagnostic tool for human interpretation.

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

• Yes, implied. The "functional and performance testing, hardware and interface testing, reliability and environmental testing" would be considered standalone testing of the device and its software. The document states, "The results demonstrated the Baha 7 Sound Processor is functionally equivalent to the Baha 6 Max Sound Processor," which is a statement about its standalone performance. However, no specific metrics or detailed results of this standalone testing are provided beyond this general statement.

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

• Instrumental measurements and compliance with specifications. For a device like a sound processor, the "ground truth" for performance would be established through calibrated laboratory instruments measuring audio output, frequency response, power consumption, signal processing accuracy, and electromagnetic emissions, compared against engineering specifications and regulatory standards. Biocompatibility is assessed against ISO 10993. Software functionality is tested against design requirements. The text confirms
  • "Biocompatibility evaluation and testing demonstrated that the materials... are biocompatible." (Ground truth: ISO 10993 standards and lab tests).
  • "Software testing was performed... demonstrated that the software supported the clinician fitting and recipient control of the Baha 7 Sound Processor." (Ground truth: Software specifications and functional requirements).
  • "Electromagnetic compatibility testing established that the sound processor did not emit excessive amounts of electromagnetic energy, and that it operated as intended in the presence of interference sources." (Ground truth: EMC standards).
  • "Bench functionality and performance testing... demonstrates that the Baha 7 SP does not result in additional safety or efficacy concerns in comparison to the predicate." (Ground truth: Engineering specifications and direct comparison to predicate device performance).

8. The sample size for the training set:

• N/A. This device does not appear to involve machine learning models that require a "training set" in the context of typical AI device submissions for diagnostic or predictive purposes. The software mentioned (Baha Fitting Software 7, Baha Smart App) are control and interface applications, not described as adaptive or learning algorithms that require large training datasets.

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

• N/A. As no training set for an AI model is indicated, this question is not applicable.

Ask a specific question about this device

FitboneTM Trochanteric is indicated for limb lengthening of the femur. FitboneTM Trochanteric is indicated for adult and pediatric (greater than 12 through 21 years of age) patients.

FitboneTM Trochanteric is a fully implantable intramedullary lengthening nail and accessories. The subject Fitbone Trochanteric consists of the implantable intramedullary lengthening nail and accessories (Locking screws, Trial nails K-wire and Convenience kits). The subject device is implanted into the medullary canal of the femur and connected to the primary predicate intracutaneous Receiver (K203399) by a bipolar feed line. The external FITBONE Control Set is the same as previously cleared for the reference device Fitbone TAA (K203399) and consists of a control electronics station and transmitter. The power required for the distraction process is controlled by hermetically enclosed motor which draws the telescope apart. The electro-magnetic field sent from the Transmitter to the Receiver is converted in the Receiver into DC-Voltage to supply the motor of the subject Fitbone Trochanteric Nails with voltage, when actioned. The subject Fitbone Trochanteric Nails are available in two different diameter models (D09mm, D11mm), different lengths and lengthening capabilities. The subject nail is anchored to the bone by locking screws. The locking screws to be used with the subject nails are the same as cleared for the primary predicate Fitbone Trochanteric (K233867). Trial nails accessories are available for each variant of the Fitbone Trochanteric nails and are used to simulate the shape of the implant. The Fitbone Trochanteric nail and K-wire are provided in sterile conditions only. The trial nails are provided in non-sterile version only. The locking screws are available in both sterile and non-sterile versions. The subject Fitbone Trochanteric Nails and their accessories are made from implant grade stainless steel 1.4441 (AISI 316LVM) and Silicone Nusilmed.

The provided document is an FDA 510(k) clearance letter for the FitboneTM Trochanteric, an intramedullary fixation rod used for limb lengthening. This type of device is classified as a Class II medical device. The document focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence to a predicate device through engineering and mechanical testing, rather than clinical studies involving human efficacy data. Therefore, many of the requested elements pertaining to clinical study design, such as human reader performance, ground truth establishment for a training set, and multi-reader multi-case studies, are not applicable here.

Here's a breakdown of the requested information based on the provided text:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

The acceptance criteria for this device are established through comparison to a predicate device and bench testing against recognized standards. The "performance" described primarily refers to mechanical properties.

2. Sample Size Used for the Test Set and Data Provenance

• Sample Size for Test Set: The document does not specify a "sample size" in terms of patient data for a test set, as this was not a clinical study assessing patient outcomes. The testing described is bench testing (mechanical testing). For mechanical testing, samples of the physical device would be tested. The number of such samples is not explicitly stated but would typically involve multiple units for each configuration tested.
• Data Provenance: The data provenance is from bench testing conducted on the subject device, its primary predicate (K233867), and reference devices (K203399, K220234). This testing would have been done in a laboratory setting, likely at the manufacturer's facility or a third-party testing lab. The origin of the device is Italy (Orthofix S.r.l.). The data is prospective in the sense that the tests were conducted specifically for this submission to evaluate the design change.

3. Number of Experts Used to Establish Ground Truth for the Test Set and Qualifications of Those Experts

Not applicable. Ground truth, in the context of this 510(k), is established through engineering specifications, material standards (e.g., ASTM F138-13), and validated mechanical testing methodologies, rather than human expert interpretation of clinical data.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set

Not applicable. There was no clinical test set requiring expert adjudication.

5. Multi-Reader Multi-Case (MRMC) Comparative Effectiveness Study

No, a Multi-Reader Multi-Case (MRMC) comparative effectiveness study was not done. This type of study is used for diagnostic devices where human readers interpret medical images or data, and an AI would assist in that interpretation. The FitboneTM Trochanteric is an implantable intramedullary lengthening nail, not a diagnostic AI software.

6. Standalone (Algorithm Only Without Human-in-the-Loop Performance) Study

Not applicable. The FitboneTM Trochanteric is a physical medical device, not a software algorithm or AI. Its function is mechanical distraction, controlled by an external unit, but it does not have a "standalone algorithm" performance to report in this context.

7. Type of Ground Truth Used

The "ground truth" for this device's performance evaluation is based on engineering specifications, material properties, and established mechanical testing standards. The primary method for establishing substantial equivalence involves comparing these aspects to a legally marketed predicate device and demonstrating that any differences do not raise new questions of safety or effectiveness.

8. Sample Size for the Training Set

Not applicable. This device does not involve a "training set" in the context of AI or machine learning. The device's design and materials are based on established engineering principles and prior device history, not on learning from a dataset.

9. How the Ground Truth for the Training Set Was Established

Not applicable, as there is no training set for this device.

Ask a specific question about this device

A-Model: The F&P Nova Micro Pillows Mask is intended to be used by adults weighing ≥ 66 lbs (30kgs) who have been prescribed non-invasive positive airway pressure therapy such as CPAP or bi-level by a physician. The F&P Nova Micro Pillows Mask is intended for single-patient use in the home.
SLA-Model: The F&P Nova Micro Pillows Mask is intended to be used by adults weighing ≥ 66 lbs (30kgs) who have been prescribed non-invasive positive airway pressure therapy such as CPAP or bi-level by a physician. The F&P Nova Micro Pillows Mask is intended for single-patient use in the home and for multiple-patient use in the hospital or other clinical settings where proper disinfection of the device can occur between patient uses.

The F&P Nova Micro Pillows Mask is a non-invasive, Positive Airway Pressure (PAP) therapy nasal pillows mask with a silicone seal that seals the nasal airway entrance of the Nova Micro Pillows Mask is designed to aid in the delivery of PAP by providing an interface between the flow generator and tubing, and the patient. The Nova Micro Pillows Mask features a pillows cushion with prongs that extrance of the patient's nasal nares, held in place by adjustable headgear straps. The Nova Micro Pillows Mask is a prescription-only device, provided in a non- sterile state. The F&P Nova Micro Pillows Maskrange is available in three cushion sizes – Small, Medium, and Large. The mask has two models: A-Model and Sleeplab (SL) A-Models are identical except for their Indications for Use, Operating Environment, and Reusability. The A-Model is intended to be single-patient use in the home, while the SL A-Model is intended to be used on multiple patients in a hospital or other clinical setting where proper disinfection of the device can occur between patient uses.

This document is a 510(k) Premarket Notification from the FDA regarding the F&P Nova Micro Pillows Mask. It primarily focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence to a predicate device based on indications for use, technological characteristics, and non-clinical performance data.

However, the provided text does not contain the specific information requested about acceptance criteria and a study proving a device meets these criteria in the context of AI/ML performance. This document describes a medical device (a CPAP mask) that is not an AI/ML device according to the information provided. Therefore, there is no discussion of performance metrics like accuracy, specificity, sensitivity, or the methodology of an AI/ML study (e.g., sample size for AI training/test sets, expert adjudication methods, MRMC studies, or ground truth establishment).

The "Performance Data" section (Section VII) lists various non-clinical tests performed on the mask, such as Cleaning Validation, Leak, Dead Space Analysis, CO2 Rebreathing, Pressure-Flow Curve, Resistance to Flow, Vibration and Noise, Human Factors/Usability Engineering, Mechanical Integrity, and Shelf-Life. These are standard engineering and safety tests for a physical medical device, not performance evaluations for an AI/ML algorithm.

Therefore, I cannot provide the requested table or details about an AI/ML study from the given text. The information is simply not present because the device described is not an AI/ML device.

Ask a specific question about this device

FITBONE® Trochanteric is indicated for limb lengthening of the femur. FITBONE® Trochanteric is indicated for adult and pediatric (greater than 12 through 21 years of age) patients.

The FITBONE® Trochanteric is a fully implantable intramedullary lengthening nail and accessories. The subject FITBONE® Trochanteric consists of the implantable intramedullary lengthening nail and accessories (Locking screws, Trial nails, K-wire and Convenience kits). The Subject device is implanted into the medullary canal of the femur and connected to the primary predicate intracutaneous Receiver (K163368) by a bipolar feed line. The external FITBONE Control Set is the same as previously cleared for the primary predicate Fitbone TAA device (K203399) and consists of a control electronics station and transmitter. There are no changes to the previously cleared Control Sets and Receiver as a result of this submission. The power required for the distraction process is controlled by hermetically enclosed motor which draws the telescope apart. The electro-magnetic field sent from the Transmitter to the Receiver is converted in the Receiver into DC-Voltage to supply the motor of the subject Fitbone Trochanteric Nails with voltage, when actioned. The subject Fitbone Trochanteric Nails are available in two different diameter models (D09mm, D11mm), different lengths and lengthening capabilities. The subject nail is anchored to the bone by subject locking screws. The locking screws are available in two variants (standard locking screws and revision locking screws), in two diameters, D4.5mm and D4mm, and in multiple lengths. The energy needed for the distraction process is transmitted from the outside by placing the external transmitter over the implanted receiver, which is placed in the subcutaneous tissue during surgery. There is no transcutaneous contact between the implanted intramedullary nail and the outer surface of the patient's body. The subject trial nails accessories are available for each variant of the Fitbone Trochanteric nails and are used to simulate the shape of the implant. The subject Fitbone Trochanteric nail and K-wire are provided in sterile conditions only. The trial nails are provided in non-sterile version only. The bone screws are available in both sterile and non-sterile versions. The subject Fitbone Trochanteric Nails and their accessories are made from, as follows: Nail: implant grade stainless steel 1.4441, according to ASTM F138-13 "Standard Specification for Wrought 18Chromium-14Nickel-2.5Molybdenum Stainless Steel Bar and Wire for Surgical Implants (UNS S31673)", and Silicone Nusilmed (NuSil MED-4870, NuSil MED-1511, Nusil MED 4750, NUSIL MED1-161, NUSIL MED2-4502). Trial nail: implant grade stainless steel 1.4441, according to ASTM F138-13 "Standard Specification for Wrought 18Chromium-14Nickel-2.5Molybdenum Stainless Steel Bar and Wire for Surgical Implants (UNS S31673)" and ASTM F899-20 Standard Specification for Wrought Stainless Steels for Surgical Instruments. Locking screws: implant grade stainless steel 1.4441, according to ASTM F138-13 "Standard Specification for Wrought 18Chromium-14Nickel-2.5Molybdenum Stainless Steel Bar and Wire for Surgical Implants (UNS S31673)" K-wire: implant grade stainless steel 1.4441, according to ASTM F138-13 "Standard Specification for Wrought 18Chromium-14Nickel-2.5Molybdenum Stainless Steel Bar and Wire for Surgical Implants (UNS S31673)" The Subject, as the primary predicate, will be implanted only by Healthcare Professionals (HCP), with full awareness of the appropriate orthopedic procedures

The provided text describes the regulatory clearance for the Orthofix Fitbone Trochanteric, an intramedullary lengthening nail. However, this document does not contain information about acceptance criteria, device performance, ground truth establishment, sample sizes for training or testing sets, expert qualifications, adjudication methods, or MRMC studies for an AI/ML powered medical device.

The document is a 510(k) summary for a traditional medical device (an intramedullary lengthening nail), not an AI/ML-powered device. Therefore, the specific types of studies and criteria outlined in your request are not relevant to this submission.

The "Performance Analysis" section describes mechanical testing performed on the implantable nails and screws to demonstrate their safety and effectiveness, based on established ASTM and ISO standards for medical devices. This is a standard non-clinical performance evaluation for mechanical orthopedic implants.

In summary, none of the requested information regarding acceptance criteria, device performance, sample sizes, ground truth, expert qualifications, or study types (MRMC, standalone) for an AI/ML device is present in the provided text because the device is not an AI/ML product.

Ask a specific question about this device

The Venue Fit is a general purpose diagnostic ultrasound system for use by qualified and trained healthcare professionals or practitioners that are legally authorized or licensed by law in the country, state or other local municipality in which he or she practices, for ultrasound imaging, measurement, display and analysis of the human body and fluid. The users may or may not be working under supervision or authority of a physician. Users may also include medical students working under the supervision or authority of a physician during their education / training. Venue Fit is intended to be used in a hospital or medical clinic. Venue Fit clinical applications include: abdominal (GYN and Urology), thoracic/pleural, ophthalmic, Fetal/OB, Small Organ (including breast, testes, thyroid), Vascular/Peripheral vascular, neonatal and adult cephalic, pediatric, musculoskeletal (conventional and superficial), cardiac (adults and pediatric), Transrectal, Transvaginal, Transesophageal, Intraoperative (vascular) and interventional guidance (includes tissue biopsy, fluid drainage, vascular and non-vascular access). Modes of operation include: B, M, PW Doppler, CW Doppler, Color M Doppler, Color M Doppler, Harmonic Imaging, Coded Pulse and Combined modes: B/M, B/Color M, B/PWD, B/Color/PWD, B/Power/PWD, B/CWD. B/Color/CWD.

The Venue Fit is a general purpose diagnostic ultrasound system. It is a portable system with a touch screen interface. It can be powered through an electrical wall outlet or an internal battery. It utilizes linear, convex, and phased array transducers and supports standard acquisition modes. Compatible biopsy kits can be used for needle-guidance procedures. The system can display the patient's ECG trace synchronized to the scanned image. A barcode reader and RFID scanner are available as additional input devices. A roller bag is available for transport. It is capable of wired or wireless internet connection and meets DICOM requirements for image storage and archiving.

The provided text describes specific features and functionalities of the GE Venue Fit ultrasound system but does not contain information about acceptance criteria, reported device performance, or a specific study proving it meets acceptance criteria as typically outlined for AI/CADe devices.

The document is a 510(k) Premarket Notification Submission for the Venue Fit ultrasound system. It primarily focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence to a predicate device (K220848 Venue Fit) regarding general imaging capabilities, technological characteristics, safety, and effectiveness.

Here's what can be extracted and what is explicitly stated as not applicable:

1. A table of acceptance criteria and the reported device performance
Not provided in the document. The document focuses on performance testing in the context of safety and effectiveness, rather than specific diagnostic accuracy metrics.

2. Sample size used for the test set and the data provenance (e.g. country of origin of the data, retrospective or prospective)
Not applicable. The document states, "The subject of this premarket submission, Venue Fit, did not require clinical studies to support substantial equivalence." Therefore, there is no test set in the context of a clinical study for diagnostic performance.

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, as no clinical studies were required.

4. Adjudication method (e.g. 2+1, 3+1, none) for the test set
Not applicable, as no clinical studies were required.

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 applicable. This document does not describe an AI/CADe device that assists human readers, nor does it present results from an MRMC study.

6. If a standalone (i.e. algorithm only without human-in-the-loop performance) was done
Not applicable. The Venue Fit is a diagnostic ultrasound system, not a standalone algorithm. Its capabilities, like "Auto Volume Flow (AVF)" or "Bladder Volume Tool", are functionalities of the ultrasound system itself, not standalone AI algorithms with reported diagnostic performance metrics.

7. The type of ground truth used (expert consensus, pathology, outcomes data, etc.)
Not applicable, as no clinical studies requiring ground truth establishment were mentioned.

8. The sample size for the training set
Not applicable. The document does not describe a machine learning algorithm that would have a training set. The "Venue Fit" is a general-purpose diagnostic ultrasound system. While it has "semi-automated tools," the document does not detail their development or any AI-specific training sets.

9. How the ground truth for the training set was established
Not applicable, as there is no mention of a training set for an AI algorithm.

Summary of what is present:

The document establishes substantial equivalence through a comparison to a predicate device (K220848 Venue Fit) and a list of reference devices (K231301 Vscan Air, K161047 LOGIQ P9 and LOGIQ P7, K231989 LOGIQ E10s/LOGIQ Fortis, K180374 Voluson S8/ S10/ S10 Expert, K202035 Vscan Air).

It outlines several non-clinical tests performed to ensure safety and compliance with standards:

• Acoustic output evaluation
• Biocompatibility
• Cleaning and disinfection effectiveness
• Thermal, electrical, electromagnetic, and mechanical safety

The system states compliance with various voluntary standards including:

• Marketing Clearance of Diagnostic Ultrasound Systems and Transducers - Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff (February 21, 2023)
• AAMI/ANSI ES60601-1 (Medical Electrical Equipment - Part 1: General Requirements for Safety)
• IEC 60601-1-2 (Electromagnetic Compatibility Requirements and Tests)
• IEC 60601-2-37 (Particular Requirements for the Safety of Ultrasonic Medical Diagnostic and Monitoring Equipment)
• IEC 62359 (Ultrasonics Field characterization Test methods for the determination of thermal and mechanical indices related to medical diagnostic ultrasonic fields)
• ISO 10993-1 (Biological Evaluation of Medical Devices-Part 1: Evaluation and Testing Within a Risk Management Process)
• ISO 14971 (Application of risk management to medical devices)
• NEMA PS 3.1 3.20e (Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine (DICOM) Set)
• AAMI TIR69 (Technical Information Report Risk management of radio-frequency wireless coexistence for medical devices and systems)

Quality assurance measures applied during development include:

• Risk Analysis
• Requirements Reviews
• Design Reviews
• Testing on unit level (Module verification)
• Integration testing (System verification)
• Performance testing (Verification & Validation)
• Safety testing (Verification)

The conclusion states that based on equipment design similarities, conformance to recognized performance standards, and performance testing, the proposed Venue Fit is considered substantially equivalent in safety, effectiveness, and performance to the predicate device.

Crucially, the document explicitly states: "The subject of this premarket submission, Venue Fit, did not require clinical studies to support substantial equivalence." This means that the information requested regarding acceptance criteria, device performance, sample sizes, ground truth, experts, adjudication, and MRMC/standalone studies in a diagnostic performance context is not available within this document.

Ask a specific question about this device

"FITBONE Transport and Lengthening system" is indicated for limb lengthening, open and closed fracture fixation, pseudoarthrosis, malunions, non-unions, or bone transport of the long bones. The "FITBONE Transport and Lengthening system" is indicated for adult only.

The subject “FITBONE® Transport and Lengthening System” consists of the implantable intramedullary transport or lengthening nail and its trial nail accessories. The Subject device is implanted into the medullary canal of the femur or tibia and connected to the additional predicate intracutaneous Receiver by a bipolar feed line. The external FITBONE Control Set is identical to that previously cleared for the additional predicate Fitbone TAA device (K203399) and consists of a control electronics station and transmitter. There are no changes to this previously cleared Control Sets and Receiver as a result of this submission. The power required for the distraction process is controlled by hermetically enclosed motor which draws the telescope apart. The electro-magnetic field sent from the Transmitter to the Receiver is converted in the Receiver into DC-Voltage to supply the motor of the FITBONE Transport and Lengthening Nail with voltage, when actioned. The subject nail is anchored to the bone by locking screws through medial-lateral and AP holes in the nail depending on the configuration holes in the nail. The energy needed for the distraction process is transmitted from the outside by placing the external transmitter over the implanted receiver, which is placed in the subcutaneous tissue during surgery. There is no transcutaneous contact between the implanted intramedullary nail and the outer surface of the patient's body. The subject trial nails accessories are available for each size model of the FITBONE Transport (TN) and FITBONE Transport or Lengthening (TLN) nails and are used to simulate the shape of the implant. The subject nails and trial nails are provided in sterile conditions only and are made from, as follows: • Nail: implant grade stainless steel 1.4441, according to ASTM F138- 13 "Standard Specification for Wrought 18Chromium-14Nickel- 2.5Molybdenum Stainless Steel Bar and Wire for Surgical Implants (UNS S31673)", and Silicone Nusilmed (NuSil MED-4870, NuSil MED- 1511, Nusil MED 4750). • Trial nail: implant grade stainless steel 1.4441, according to ASTM F138-13 "Standard Specification for Wrought 18Chromium-14Nickel- 2.5Molybdenum Stainless Steel Bar and Wire for Surgical Implants (UNS S31673)" and ASTM F899-20 Standard Specification for Wrought Stainless Steels for Surgical Instruments For the implantation and removal of the subject device the same instruments of the additional predicate Fitbone TAA (K203399) may be used.

The provided text is a 510(k) summary for a medical device (FITBONE® Transport and Lengthening System). It details the device's indications for use, technological characteristics, and a comparison to predicate devices, but it does not contain information about acceptance criteria or a study proving the device meets those criteria in the context of an AI/ML-based medical device.

The document describes mechanical testing (bench testing) to demonstrate the equivalence of the subject device to its predicates for physical attributes like bending, fatigue, and torsional strength, and current consumption of the motor. This is typical for implantable mechanical devices.

Therefore, I cannot provide the requested information regarding acceptance criteria and studies for an AI/ML device, including details about sample sizes, data provenance, expert qualifications, ground truth establishment, or MRMC studies, as these concepts are not applicable to the content provided in the input text.

The document discusses performance in terms of mechanical and functional equivalence of a physical medical device, not the performance of an AI/ML algorithm.

Ask a specific question about this device

The MAGNETOM system is indicated for use as a magnetic resonance diagnostic device (MRDD) that produces transverse, sagittal, coronal and oblique cross sectional images, spectroscopic images and/or spectra, and that displays the internal structure and/or function of the head, body, or extremities. Other physical parameters derived from the images and/or spectra may also be produced. Depending on the region of interest, contrast agents may be used. These images and/or spectra and the physical parameters derived from the images and/or spectra when interpreted by a trained physician yield information that may assist in diagnosis.

The MAGNETOM system may also be used for imaging during interventional procedures when performed with MR compatible devices such as in-room displays and MR Safe biopsy needles.

The subject device, MAGNETOM Cima.X Fit with software syngo MR XA61A, consists of new and modified software and hardware that is similar to what is currently offered on the predicate device, MAGNETOM Vida with syngo MR XA50A (K213693).

A high-level summary of the new and modified hardware and software is provided below:

For MAGNETOM Cima.X Fit with syngo MR XA61:

Hardware

New Hardware:
→ 3D Camera

Modified Hardware:

• → Host computers ((syngo MR Acquisition Workplace (MRAWP) and syngo MR Workplace (MRWP)).

• MaRS (Measurement and Reconstruction System).

• → Gradient Coil
• → Cover
• → Cooling/ACSC
• → SEP
• → GPA
• → RFCEL Temp
• → Body Coil
• → Tunnel light

Software

New Features and Applications:

• -> GRE_PC
• → Physio logging
• -> Deep Resolve Boost HASTE

• Deep Resolve Boost EPI Diffusion

• → Open Recon
• -> Ghost reduction (DPG)
• -> Fleet Ref Scan
• → Manual Mode
• → SAMER
• → MR Fingerprinting (MRF)1

Modified Features and Applications:

• → BEAT nav (re-naming only).

• myExam Angio Advanced Assist (Test Bolus).

• → Beat Sensor (all sequences).

• Stimulation monitoring

• -> Complex Averaging

I am sorry, but the provided text does not contain the acceptance criteria and the comprehensive study details you requested for the "MAGNETOM Cima.X Fit" device, particularly point-by-point information on a multi-reader multi-case (MRMC) comparative effectiveness study or specific quantitative acceptance criteria for its AI features like Deep Resolve Boost or Deep Resolve Sharp.

The document is a 510(k) summary for a Magnetic Resonance Diagnostic Device (MRDD), highlighting its substantial equivalence to a predicate device. While it mentions AI features and their training/validation, it does not provide the detailed performance metrics or study design to fully answer your request.

Here's what can be extracted based on the provided text, and where information is missing:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance:

The document mentions that the impact of the AI networks (Deep Resolve Boost and Deep Resolve Sharp) has been characterized by "several quality metrics such as peak signal-to-noise ratio (PSNR) and structural similarity index (SSIM)," and evaluated by "visual comparisons to evaluate e.g., aliasing artifacts, image sharpness and denoising levels" and "perceptual loss." For Deep Resolve Sharp, "an evaluation of image sharpness by intensity profile comparisons of reconstructions with and without Deep Resolve Sharp" was also conducted.

However, specific numerical acceptance criteria (e.g., PSNR > X, SSIM > Y), or the actual reported performance values against these criteria are not provided in the text. The document states that the conclusions from the non-clinical data suggest that the features bear an equivalent safety and performance profile to that of the predicate device, but no quantitative data to support this for the AI features is included in this summary.

• SSIM (implied to be high)
• Visual comparisons (e.g., absence of aliasing artifacts, good image sharpness, effective denoising levels) | Impact characterized by these metrics and visual comparisons. Claims of equivalent safety and performance profile to predicate device. No specific quantitative performance values (e.g., actual PSNR/SSIM scores) are reported in this document. |
  | Deep Resolve Sharp | - PSNR (implied to be high)
• SSIM (implied to be high)
• Perceptual loss
• Visual rating
• Image sharpness by intensity profile comparisons (reconstructions with and without Deep Resolve Sharp) | Impact characterized by these metrics, verified and validated by in-house tests. Claims of equivalent safety and performance profile to predicate device. No specific quantitative performance values are reported in this document. |

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

• Deep Resolve Boost:
  • Test Set Description: The text mentions that "the performance was evaluated by visual comparisons." It does not explicitly state a separate test set size beyond the validation data used during development. It implies the performance evaluation was based on the broad range of data covered during training and validation.
  • Data Provenance: Not specified (country of origin or retrospective/prospective). The data was "retrospectively created from the ground truth by data manipulation and augmentation."
• Deep Resolve Sharp:
  • Test Set Description: The text mentions "in-house tests. These tests include visual rating and an evaluation of image sharpness by intensity profile comparisons of reconstructions with and without Deep Resolve Sharp." Similar to Deep Resolve Boost, a separate test set size is not explicitly stated. It implies these tests were performed on data from the more than 10,000 high-resolution 2D images used for training and validation.
  • Data Provenance: Not specified (country of origin or retrospective/prospective). The data was "retrospectively created from the ground truth by data manipulation."

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

• Not specified. The document mentions "visual comparisons" and "visual rating" as part of the evaluation but does not detail how many experts were involved or their qualifications.

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

• Not specified.

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, an MRMC comparative effectiveness study is not mentioned in this document as being performed to establish substantial equivalence for the AI features. The document relies on technical metrics and visual comparisons of image quality to demonstrate equivalence.

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

• The evaluation mentioned, using metrics like PSNR, SSIM, perceptual loss, and intensity profile comparisons, are indicative of standalone algorithm performance in terms of image quality. Visual comparisons and ratings would involve human observers, but the primary focus described is on the image output quality itself from the algorithm. However, no specific "standalone" study design with comparative performance metrics (e.g., standalone diagnostic accuracy) is detailed.

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

• Deep Resolve Boost: "The acquired datasets (as described above) represent the ground truth for the training and validation." This implies the high-quality, full-data MRI scans before artificial undersampling or noise addition served as the ground truth. This is a technical ground truth based on the original acquired MRI data, not a clinical ground truth like pathology or expert consensus on a diagnosis.
• Deep Resolve Sharp: "The acquired datasets represent the ground truth for the training and validation." Similar to Deep Resolve Boost, this refers to technical ground truth from high-resolution 2D images before manipulation.

8. The sample size for the training set:

• Deep Resolve Boost:
  • TSE: more than 25,000 slices
  • HASTE: pre-trained on the TSE dataset and refined with more than 10,000 HASTE slices
  • EPI Diffusion: more than 1,000,000 slices
• Deep Resolve Sharp: on more than 10,000 high resolution 2D images.

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

• Deep Resolve Boost: "The acquired datasets (as described above) represent the ground truth for the training and validation. Input data was retrospectively created from the ground truth by data manipulation and augmentation. This process includes further under-sampling of the data by discarding k-space lines, lowering of the SNR level by addition Restricted of noise and mirroring of k-space data."
• Deep Resolve Sharp: "The acquired datasets represent the ground truth for the training and validation. Input data was retrospectively created from the ground truth by data manipulation. k-space data has been cropped such that only the center part of the data was used as input. With this method corresponding low-resolution data as input and high-resolution data as output / ground truth were created for training and validation."

In summary, the document focuses on the technical aspects of the AI features and their development, demonstrating substantial equivalence through non-clinical performance tests and image quality assessments, rather than clinical efficacy studies with specific diagnostic accuracy endpoints or human-AI interaction evaluations.

Ask a specific question about this device