Search Results

The Gish Tubing and Connectors with HA Coating are indicated for use in Surgical procedures to provide a conduit for extracorporeal blood flow when interconnecting components of the bypass circuit It is designed to operate at flow rates of one (1 0) to six (6) liters per minute for periods up to six (6) hours

The Gish Tubing and Connectors with HA Coating are used in surgical procedures to provide a conduit for extracorporeal blood flow when interconnecting components of the bypass cırcuit - Specifically they are used in connecting oxygenators, reservoirs, filters, heat exchangers and other devices used in surgical procedures The tubing is polyvinyl chloride (PVC) The connectors are polycarbonate of various configurations such as straight, "Y", Luer and reducer types. The components of this system which have contact with the fluid path are sterle and nonpyroqenic. All materials of the Gish Tubing and Connectors are biocompatible and coated with a proprietary coating. The Gish Tubing and Connectors with HA Coating may be purchased separately or pre-connected with tubing and other components of an extracorporeal circuit.

The provided text describes the Gish Tubing and Connectors with HA Coating, a medical device used in cardiopulmonary bypass procedures. However, the text explicitly states that "The Gish Tubing and Connectors with HA Coating has been subjected to extensive safety, performance, and validations prior to release. Final testing for the systems includes various performance tests designed to ensure that the device meets all of its functional requirements and performance specifications." It further concludes that "The conclusion drawn from these tests is that Gish Tubing and Connectors with HA Coating is equivalent in safety and efficacy to its predicated devices."

Despite these statements, the document does not provide any specific acceptance criteria or detailed results of the studies conducted to demonstrate that the device meets those criteria. It mentions "extensive safety, performance, and validations" and "various performance tests" but does not enumerate the criteria, the reported device performance against them, or the methodology of these tests.

Therefore, I cannot fully complete the requested table and answer the study-related questions based solely on the provided text.

Here's an attempt to answer based on the available information, with specific notes about what is missing:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

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

• Sample Size for Test Set: Not specified.
• Data Provenance: Not specified (e.g., country of origin, retrospective or prospective). The document only generally refers to "extensive safety, performance, and validations prior to release."

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. The device is a physical tubing and connector system, and "ground truth" would likely refer to objective performance metrics (e.g., burst pressure, flow rate, biocompatibility) rather than expert interpretation of images or data.

4. Adjudication method for the test set

• Not applicable/Not specified. Given the nature of the device (physical components), an adjudication method as typically used for expert consensus on diagnostic interpretations is unlikely. Performance tests would likely involve objective measurements.

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 was not done. This type of study is relevant for AI or diagnostic imaging devices where human interpretation is involved. This device is a cardiopulmonary bypass tubing and connector system, not an AI or diagnostic tool.

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

• No, this is not applicable for this device. This term is relevant for AI algorithms. The Gish Tubing and Connectors with HA Coating is a physical medical device. The "standalone" performance would refer to the device's inherent physical and functional properties, which the text states were "subjected to extensive safety, performance, and validations."

7. The type of ground truth used

• Implicitly, the ground truth would be objective performance specifications and safety standards. For example, tests would likely establish metrics such as:
  • Biocompatibility (e.g., according to ISO standards)
  • Flow rates (specified as 1 to 6 liters per minute)
  • Pressure resistance
  • Tensile strength
  • Leak integrity
  • Sterility
  • Non-pyrogenicity
  • Durability for up to six hours of operation.
• The document states "All materials of the Gish Tubing and Connectors are biocompatible and coated with a proprietary coating." This indicates biocompatibility testing was a factor.

8. The sample size for the training set

• Not applicable/Not specified. This device is not an AI algorithm that requires a "training set." The development process would involve iterative design, testing, and validation of physical prototypes, not machine learning training.

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

• Not applicable. (See answer to #8).

Summary of what the document does state regarding studies:

• "The Gish Tubing and Connectors with HA Coating has been subjected to extensive safety, performance, and validations prior to release."
• "Final testing for the systems includes various performance tests designed to ensure that the device meets all of its functional requirements and performance specifications."
• "A review of literature pertaining to the safety and effectiveness has been conducted."
• "The conclusion drawn from these tests is that Gish Tubing and Connectors with HA Coating is equivalent in safety and efficacy to its predicated devices."

The document focuses on declaring equivalence to predicate devices and adherence to internal specifications rather than detailing the specific acceptance criteria and study results.

Ask a specific question about this device