Search Results

Hi-Fatigue Bone Cement is intended for use in arthroplastic procedures of the hip, knee and other joints for the fixation of polymer or metallic prosthetic implants to living bone.

Hi-Fatique Bone Cement is a PMMA, radiopaque bone cement, designed for the fixation of prothesis to the living bone. Hi-Fatigue Bone Cement is a traditional bone cement product. The bone cement is made of two separate sterile components. When both components are mixed together, they become a self-hardening, radiopaque bone cement which fixes the implant. The liquid is contained in a vial and the powder in a pouch; these components are packed in blister with Tyvek lid or an aluminium pouch. The devices are sold disposable, single-use and sterile.

This appears to be a 510(k) summary for a bone cement device, not an AI/ML medical device. Therefore, the requested information about acceptance criteria, study details, and ground truth establishment for AI/ML performance is not found in this document.

The document discusses performance data related to the physical and chemical properties of bone cement, referring to a "FDA Class II Special Controls Guidance Document: Polymethylacrylate (PMMA) Bone Cement; Guidance for Industry and FDA" dated July 17, 2002.

Here's an attempt to extract relevant information, acknowledging the mismatch with the prompt's AI/ML focus:

1. A table of acceptance criteria and the reported device performance

The document states that "The performance data demonstrate that the new devices Hi-Fatigue Bone Cement is substantially equivalent to the predicate device Palacos® R... and meet the requirements of the Special Controls Guidance document."

Unfortunately, the specific acceptance criteria values (e.g., minimum compressive strength, maximum polymerization temperature) and the reported device performance values for each of the mechanical, physical, and chemical properties are not explicitly listed in a comparative table within this 510(k) summary. The summary only lists the types of tests performed.

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 provided in the 510(k) summary. The performance data section vaguely states "non-clinical performance testing was performed."

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)

This is not applicable as the device is a bone cement, not an AI/ML imaging device requiring expert ground truth for interpretation.

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

This is not applicable as the device is a bone cement.

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 is not applicable as the device is a bone cement, not an AI/ML imaging device.

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

This is not applicable as the device is a bone cement.

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

For a bone cement, "ground truth" would relate to the established physical, chemical, and biological properties defined by industry standards or regulatory guidance. The document states that testing was "in accordance with the 'FDA Class II Special Controls Guidance Document: Polymethylacrylate (PMMA) Bone Cement; Guidance for Industry and FDA' dated July 17, 2002." This guidance document would define the expected performance characteristics that the device must meet or be substantially equivalent to.

8. The sample size for the training set

This is not applicable as the device is a bone cement and does not involve AI/ML training.

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

This is not applicable as the device is a bone cement and does not involve AI/ML training.

Ask a specific question about this device