Search Results

The Intuitive Surgical® Endoscopic Instrument Control System (hereinafter referred to as the "da Vinci™ System") is intended to assist in the accurate control of Intuitive Surgical® endoscopic instruments including: rigid endoscopes, blunt and sharp endoscopic dissectors, scissors, scalpels, forceps/pick-ups, needle holders, endoscopic retractors, stabilizers, electrocautery and accessories during laparoscopic surgical procedures such as cholecystectomy, Nissen fundoplication, radical prostatectomy, and general non-cardiac thoracoscopic surgical procedures such as internal mammary artery mobilization. It is intended to be used by trained physicians in an operating room environment.

Intuitive Surgical Endoscopic Instruments including scissors, scalpels, forceps/pick-ups, needle drivers and electrocautery are intended for endoscopic manipulation of tissue, including: grasping, cutting, blunt and sharp dissection, approximation, ligation, electrocautery and suturing.

The Intuitive Surgical® Endoscopic Instrument Control System (Model IS1200), also known as the da Vinci™ Surgical System, consists of three major integrated sub-systems. The major sub-systems are as follows:

Intuitive Surgical® Endoscopic Instrument Control System: This subsystem of the da Vinci™ Surgical System is comprised of the Surgeon Console and Patient Side Cart. While seated at the Surgeon Console, the surgeon controls virtually all critical aspects of the procedure, including movement of the endoscopic instruments and endoscope, within the operative field. Endoscopic instrument and camera movements are controlled by the surgeon through use of the Master Tool Manipulators (MTM), two hand operated mechanisms residing within the Surgeon Console. The endoscopic instruments are held in a fixed position (with respect to the patient) by either two (or optionally three) unique arms known as Patient Side Manipulators (PSM), which are located on the Patient Side Cart (PSC). The endoscope is also held in a fixed position (with respect to the patient) by another arm, similar to the PSM, known as the Endoscope Camera Manipulator (ECM), also located on the PSC. Commands from the Surgeon Console are relayed to the PSC, which is located immediately adjacent to the patient, via a cable array. Instrument and endoscope changes are performed by another provider positioned adjacent to the PSC.

Intuitive Surgical Stereo View Endoscopic System: The endoscopic vision system used with the da Vinci™ Surgical System, known as Intuitive Surgical® Insite™ Vision System, consists of a stereo endoscope, endoscopic camera, and various accessories, including a light source and light guides. The Insite™ Vision System provides two independent images that are relayed to the viewer located in the Surgeon Console, where they are fused to form a 3-D (or alternatively a 2-D image) of the surgical field.

Intuitive Surgical® Endoscopic Instruments: The da Vinci™ Surgical System is designed to use unique endoscopic instruments utilizing a proprietary architecture conveying movements similar to those of the human wrist. These movements - yaw, pitch, rotation, and insertion/withdrawal - are controlled by the surgeon seated at the Surgeon Console. These endoscopic instruments, many of which are referred to as EndoWrist™ endoscopic instruments, include scissors. scalpels, graspers/forceps/pick-ups, needle holders, ultrasonic shears, and electrocautery instruments.

The provided text is a 510(k) summary for the Intuitive Surgical da Vinci Surgical System. It describes the device, its intended use, and argues for its substantial equivalence to previously marketed predicate devices. However, this document does not contain a detailed study that proves the device meets specific acceptance criteria in the way a clinical performance study would for an AI/CAD-driven diagnostic device.

Instead, the submission relies on demonstrating substantial equivalence to predicate devices. This means that if the new device is sufficiently similar to an already legally marketed device (the predicate), and it doesn't raise new questions of safety or effectiveness, it can be cleared for market. The "performance data" section explicitly states: "Design analysis and comparison as well as appropriate safety testing confirm that basic functional characteristics are substantially equivalent to the predicate device cited."

Therefore, I cannot populate most of the requested fields because the nature of the submission (510(k) for a surgical system based on substantial equivalence) does not involve the type of acceptance criteria and clinical study design typically associated with AI/CAD devices for diagnostic purposes.

Here's how I can address your request based on the provided text:

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

The device is described as "essentially identical in terms of shape, size, function, activation, and intended use" to the predicate device.

Technological characteristics are "virtually identical" to the predicate devices.

The FDA's decision to clear the device implies that the provided information was sufficient to establish safety and effectiveness for the stated indications when compared to the predicate. |
| Intended Use (consistent with predicate) | The device's "Intended Use" statement aligns with laparoscopic surgical procedures, including cholecystectomy, Nissen fundoplication, radical prostatectomy, and general non-cardiac thoracoscopic surgical procedures. The instruments are intended for manipulation of tissue including grasping, cutting, blunt and sharp dissection, approximation, ligation, electrocautery, and suturing. This is presented as substantially equivalent to the predicate device. |
| Technological Characteristics (similar to predicate) | The technological characteristics of the subject device (Intuitive Surgical® da Vinci™ Surgical System) are stated to be "virtually identical" to the predicate devices. This includes the major integrated sub-systems: Endoscopic Instrument Control System (Surgeon Console, Patient Side Cart, Master Tool Manipulators, Patient Side Manipulators, Endoscope Camera Manipulator), Stereo View Endoscopic System (stereo endoscope, endoscopic camera, accessories, 3-D/2-D imaging), and Endoscopic Instruments (unique architecture, EndoWrist™ instruments like scissors, scalpels, graspers, needle holders, ultrasonic shears, electrocautery). |

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 document. The submission is based on "design analysis and comparison" and "appropriate safety testing," rather than a clinical trial with 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 (e.g. radiologist with 10 years of experience)

This information is not provided. Ground truth establishment for a test set is not described as part of this type of submission.

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

This information is not provided. Adjudication methods are not applicable to the "design analysis and comparison" approach 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

There is no indication that an MRMC comparative effectiveness study was done. The device is a surgical system, not an AI-assisted diagnostic tool, so the concept of "human readers improve with AI vs without AI assistance" does not apply in this context.

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

This information is not provided and is not applicable. The da Vinci Surgical System is clearly a human-in-the-loop device, intended to be used by "trained physicians." It is a tool for surgeons, not an autonomous system.

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

As a substantial equivalence submission for a surgical system, the "ground truth" implicitly refers to the established safety and efficacy of the predicate devices for their indicated uses, confirmed through design analysis and appropriate safety testing of the new device to demonstrate comparable performance. There is no mention of specific expert consensus, pathology, or outcomes data used to establish "ground truth" in the context of a performance study for the device itself.

8. The sample size for the training set

This information is not provided. The da Vinci Surgical System is a robotic surgical platform; the concept of a "training set" in the context of machine learning or AI algorithms is not directly applicable to a 510(k) submission for this type of hardware system based on substantial equivalence.

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

This information is not provided and is not applicable for the reasons stated above.

Ask a specific question about this device