Search Filters

Search Results

Found 1 results

510(k) Data Aggregation

    K Number
    K993181
    Date Cleared
    1999-10-22

    (29 days)

    Product Code
    Regulation Number
    888.3060
    Reference & Predicate Devices
    N/A
    Why did this record match?
    Device Name :

    HOWMEDICA OSTEONICS ACCP SYSTEM CORTICAL SCREWS

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

    The indications for the use of the Howmedica Osteonics® ACCP System are as follows:

    • degenerative disc disease (neck pain of discogenic origin with degeneration of the disc confirmed by patient history and radiographic studies).
    • decompression of the spinal cord following total or partial cervical vertebrectomy .
    • . trauma (fractures)
    • . tumors
    • pseudarthrosis .
    • . failed previous fusions
    Device Description

    The Howmedica Osteonics® ACCP System is an anterior cervical single or multi-level plate that incorporates either a monoblock or modular design, which is measured from end to end. Modular end plate sections are secured to each other using locking screws, and are provided preassembled. The Howmedica Osteonics® ACCP is placed longitudinally on the long axis of the cervical spine and is affixed by cortical bone screws. All Howmedica Osteonics® ACCP System components are manufactured from ASTM F-136-98 (ISO 5832/3) titanium alloy.

    AI/ML Overview

    The provided document is a 510(k) Premarket Notification Summary for the Howmedica Osteonics® ACCP System - Cortical Screws. This document focuses on the substantial equivalence of a new device to a predicate device, rather than providing details on a study performed to meet specific acceptance criteria for a novel device.

    Therefore, most of the requested information regarding acceptance criteria and a study proving the device meets those criteria cannot be extracted from this document, as it describes a regulatory submission for a device component based on equivalence, not a new device requiring extensive performance testing against defined metrics.

    Here's a breakdown of what can be inferred or stated from the provided text based on your request:

    1. Table of acceptance criteria and the reported device performance:

    This information is not present in the document. The submission is a 510(k) for a component (cortical screws) of an existing system (ACCP System). The primary "acceptance criteria" here is substantial equivalence to a predicate device, not performance metrics from a new study.

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

    This information is not present. The document does not describe a performance study with a test set.

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

    This information is not present. There is no "test set" described as part of a performance study.

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

    This information is not present. There is no "test set" described as part of a performance study.

    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:

    This information is not present. The device is a physical medical implant (cortical screws), not an AI-assisted diagnostic or therapeutic tool. Therefore, an MRMC study related to AI assistance would not be applicable.

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

    This information is not present. The device is a physical medical implant, not an algorithm.

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

    This information is not present. There is no "ground truth" mentioned as part of a performance study. The ground for the submission is the substantial equivalence to an existing, legally marketed predicate device.

    8. The sample size for the training set:

    This information is not present. The document does not describe a machine learning algorithm or a training set.

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

    This information is not present. The document does not describe a machine learning algorithm or a training set.


    Summary of Device and Regulatory Basis (from the document):

    • Device Name: Howmedica Osteonics® Anterior Cervical Compression Plating System - Cortical Screws
    • Common Name: Anterior Cervical Compression Plate
    • Classification Name and Reference: Spinal Invertebral Body Fixation (21 CFR §888.3060)
    • Predicate Device: Cortical bone screws in the Howmedica Osteonics® ACCP System.
    • Basis for Acceptance: Substantial equivalence in design, intended use, and material (ASTM F-136-98 (ISO 5832/3) titanium alloy) to the predicate device.
    • Intended Use/Indications: Degenerative disc disease, decompression of the spinal cord (following total or partial cervical vertebrectomy), trauma (fractures), tumors, pseudarthrosis, and failed previous fusions.
    Ask a Question

    Ask a specific question about this device

    Page 1 of 1