Search Results

Force Fiber® Non-absorbable Surgical Sutures are indicated for use in approximation and/or ligation of soft tissues, including use in cardiovascular surgeries and the use of allograft tissue for orthopedic surgeries.

Force Fiber Suture - Black is a non-absorbable, sterile, surgical suture composed of Ultra High Molecular Weight Polyethylene (UHMWPE) dyed black using D&C Black #4 not to exceed 1.0% by weight. It is an uncoated braid offered in a variety of cut lengths, with or without needles, and provided sterile for single use only. Force Fiber Suture - Black is available in sizes 0, 1 and 2, and meets all surgical suture requirements established by the USP for non-absorbable surgical sutures except for oversize diameter.

This document is a 510(k) summary for a medical device called "Force Fiber® Suture - Black." It primarily focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence to previously cleared predicate devices, rather than presenting a study where specific performance criteria are measured against acceptance criteria. Therefore, much of the requested information regarding study design, sample sizes, expert involvement, and ground truth establishment is not present in this document.

However, I can extract the general acceptance criteria and what is reported about the device's performance based on the provided text.

Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

• Suture diameter
• Tensile strength
• Needle attachment | "Force Fiber Suture - Black is available in sizes 0, 1 and 2, and meets all surgical suture requirements established by the USP for non-absorbable surgical sutures except for oversize diameter."
  "Force Fiber Suture - Black is tested in accordance with USP - non-absorbable surgical sutures for suture diameter, tensile strength and needle attachment, and meet the requirements of the Class II Special Controls Guidance: Surgical Sutures; Guidance for Industry and FDA; June 3, 2003." |
  | Material Biocompatibility (ISO 10993-1:2018) | Evaluation through biological qualification safety tests as outlined in ISO 10993-1: 2018 --Biological Evaluation of Medical Devices - Part 1: Evaluation and Testing. This implies meeting the safety requirements for medical devices in contact with the body. | "All materials used in the fabrication of the Force Fiber Suture - Black were evaluated through biological qualification safety tests as outlined in ISO 10993-1: 2018 --Biological Evaluation of Medical Devices - Part 1: Evaluation and Testing." |
  | MRI Safety | "MR Safe" designation, meaning it poses no known hazards in MR environments. | "Force Fiber Suture - Black is tested to demonstrate it is "MR Safe" and poses no known hazards in MR environments." |
  | Substantial Equivalence | No differences in technological characteristics and performance characteristics compared to predicate devices, and the difference (addition of black dye) does not raise new questions of safety or efficacy, making it as safe and effective as currently marketed predicate devices. This is the primary "acceptance criterion" for a 510(k) pathway. | "Force Fiber Suture – Black is substantially equivalent to its predicate Force Fiber Suture devices because there are no differences in technological characteristics and performance characteristics between the proposed and predicate devices. The proposed sutures have the same fundamental design and intended use as the predicate devices. The difference between Force Fiber Suture - Black and its predicate Force Fiber Suture devices is the addition of black dye... This difference does not raise new questions of safety or efficacy. Therefore, Force Fiber Suture - Black is as safe and effective as its currently marketed predicate devices." |

Information Not Available in the Document:

Because this document is a 510(k) summary demonstrating substantial equivalence for a surgical suture, not a clinical study report for an AI/imaging device, the following information is not provided:

2. Sample size used for the test set and the data provenance: Not applicable in this context. The testing mentioned refers to material properties and biocompatibility, not performance against a specific "test set" of patient data.
3. Number of experts used to establish the ground truth for the test set and the qualifications of those experts: Not applicable. Ground truth as typically understood for AI algorithms (e.g., diagnostic accuracy) is not relevant here.
4. Adjudication method (e.g. 2+1, 3+1, none) for the test set: Not applicable.
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 device is a surgical suture, not an AI-assisted diagnostic tool.
6. If a standalone (i.e. algorithm only without human-in-the-loop performance) was done: Not applicable.
7. The type of ground truth used (expert consensus, pathology, outcomes data, etc.): For material properties, the "ground truth" would be established by validated testing methods and specifications (e.g., USP standards), not expert consensus on medical images or outcomes.
8. The sample size for the training set: Not applicable. This is not an AI/ML device requiring a training set.
9. How the ground truth for the training set was established: Not applicable.

In summary, the provided document describes a medical device (surgical suture) and demonstrates its compliance with established regulatory standards (USP, ISO) and substantial equivalence to existing predicate devices. It does not involve AI or imaging diagnostics, and therefore, many of the requested data points related to those types of studies are not relevant or present.

Ask a specific question about this device

The MedShape, Inc., Porous Morphix® Suture Anchor with Force Fibere is intended for fixation of suture to bone in the shoulder, footlankle, knee, hand/wrist and elbow in the following procedures:

• Rotator Cuff Repair, Bankart Repair, SLAP Lesion Repair, Shoulder: Biceps Tenodesis. Acromio-Clavicular Separation Repair, Deltoid Repair. Capsular Shift or Capsulolabral Reconstruction
• Lateral Stabilization, Medial Stabilization, Achilles Tendon Repair, Hallux Foot/Ankle: Valgus Reconstruction, Mid-foot Reconstruction, Metatarsal Ligament Repair
• Medial Collateral Ligament Repair, Lateral Collateral Ligament Repair, Knee: Patellar Tendon Repair, Posterior Oblique Ligament Repair, Iliotibial Band Tenodesis
• Ulnar Collateral Ligament Scapholunate Ligament Reconstruction, Hand/Wrist: Reconstruction, Radial Collateral Ligament Reconstruction
• Biceps Tendon Reattachment, Tennis Elbow Repair, Ulnar or Radial Elbow: collateral Ligament Reconstruction

The proposed Porous Morphix® Suture Anchor with Force Fiber® Suture is a line extension to our Morphix® product family and is substantially equivalent to the Morphix® Suture Anchor with Opti-Fiber™ Suture, cleared under K091202, in which the features and intended uses are the same. In addition, the technological characteristics of the Morphix® and the Porous Morphix® Suture Anchor are equivalent. Differences between the Porous Morphix® Suture Anchor and the MedShape predicate Morphix® Suture Anchor include an extruded porous layer on the top surface of the device and a change in the preferred suture supplier (suture supplier CP Medical, previously cleared under K041894, was switched to suture supplier Teleflex Medical, previously cleared under K033654). This porous surface is derived directly from the implant body and is not a sintered coating.

The provided text describes a 510(k) submission for a medical device, the Porous Morphix® Suture Anchor with Force Fiber® Suture. However, it does not contain information about acceptance criteria or a study proving the device meets specific acceptance criteria in the way typically associated with AI/ML device performance.

Instead, the document focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence to a predicate device (MedShape, Inc., WedgeLoc™ Suture Anchor with Opti-Fiber™ Suture - now referred to as Morphix®, K091202) based on:

• Same Intended Uses: The new device has the same indications for use as the predicate.
• Equivalent Technological Characteristics: Analysis of non-clinical test results (monotonic and post cyclic suture fixation strength in Sawbone® bone analogue [pull-to-failure], dimensional verification, and material safety data [both bio and MRI compatibility]) supports this equivalence.
• Minor Differences: The differences are an extruded porous layer on the top surface of the device and a change in suture supplier. These differences were determined not to raise questions concerning safety and effectiveness.

Therefore, I cannot fulfill your request for:

1. A table of acceptance criteria and reported device performance.
2. Sample size used for the test set and data provenance.
3. Number of experts and their qualifications for ground truth.
4. Adjudication method.
5. MRMC comparative effectiveness study.
6. Standalone performance.
7. Type of ground truth used.
8. Sample size for the training set.
9. How ground truth for the training set was established.

These points are relevant to AI/ML device validation, which is a different regulatory pathway and type of study than what is presented in this 510(k) summary for a physical medical device (suture anchor).

Ask a specific question about this device