Search Results
Found 1 results
510(k) Data Aggregation
(70 days)
K7 LUMBAR SPACERS
The K7 Lumbar Spacers are indicated for intervertebral body fusion of the lumbar spine, from L2 to S1, in skeletally mature patients who have had six months of non-operative treatment. The device is intended for use at either one level or two contiguous levels for the treatment of degenerative disc disease (DDD) with up to Grade I spondylolisthesis or retrolisthesis. DDD is defined as back pain of discogenic origin with degeneration of the disc confirmed by history and radiographic studies. The device is intended for use with supplemental fixation and with autograft to facilitate fusion.
The K7 Lumbar Spacers are a collection of radiolucent interbody devices having variously shaped cross-sections. The superior and inferior surfaces are open with parallel serrations to facilitate implant stability. The implants are available in an assortment of height, length, width and anteroposterior angulation combinations to accommodate a variety of anatomic requirements.
The provided text describes the K7 Lumbar Spacers, a medical device for intervertebral body fusion. The study presented focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence to predicate devices through mechanical testing, rather than a clinical study evaluating the device's performance in a human population.
Therefore, many of the requested categories related to clinical performance metrics, ground truth establishment, expert involvement, and reader studies are not applicable or cannot be extracted from this document, as the FDA 510(k) submission for this device type typically relies on demonstrating engineering and material equivalence for clearance.
Here's a breakdown of the information that can be extracted, and where the requested information is not applicable:
1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance
Acceptance Criteria (from predicate devices / standards) | Reported Device Performance (K7 Lumbar Spacers) |
---|---|
Mechanical Testing: |
- Static Compression (according to ASTM F2077)
- Dynamic Compression (according to ASTM F2077) | Performance shown to be substantially equivalent to predicate devices. |
| Subsidence Properties: - Evaluated according to ASTM F2267 | Performance shown to be substantially equivalent to predicate devices. |
| Technological Characteristics: - Intended Use
- Basic Design (hollow column)
- Material (PEEK polymer and tantalum)
- Sizes (widths, lengths, heights within predicate range) | Same as predicate devices. |
2. Sample Size Used for the Test Set and Data Provenance
- Sample Size: Not explicitly stated as a "test set" in the context of clinical data. The mechanical testing was likely performed on a representative sample of K7 Lumbar Spacers of the "worst case" configuration. The specific number of units tested for static, dynamic compression, and subsidence is not provided.
- Data Provenance: The data is from mechanical testing of the device itself (K7 Lumbar Spacers) in a laboratory setting, not from human subjects. Therefore, country of origin or retrospective/prospective clinical data is not applicable.
3. Number of Experts Used to Establish the Ground Truth for the Test Set and Qualifications
- This is not applicable. The "ground truth" for this device's regulatory clearance is established by engineering standards (ASTM F2077, ASTM F2267) and comparison to predicate device characteristics, not by expert clinical consensus on a "test set" of patient data.
4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set
- This is not applicable, as there was no clinical "test set" involving human interpretation or adjudication.
5. Multi-Reader Multi-Case (MRMC) Comparative Effectiveness Study
- No, an MRMC comparative effectiveness study was not done. This device is a spinal implant, and its regulatory clearance here is based on mechanical performance and material equivalence, not on the interpretative performance of a diagnostic algorithm or image analysis by human readers.
6. Standalone (i.e., algorithm only without human-in-the-loop performance) Study
- No, a standalone study in the context of AI algorithm performance was not done. This device is a physical implant, not an AI algorithm.
7. Type of Ground Truth Used
- For the mechanical performance, the "ground truth" is defined by engineering standards (ASTM F2077 for compression, ASTM F2267 for subsidence) and the established performance/characteristics of legally marketed predicate devices. The goal was to demonstrate that the K7 Lumbar Spacers met or were equivalent to these benchmarks.
8. Sample Size for the Training Set
- This is not applicable. There is no "training set" in the context of machine learning or AI as this is a physical medical device.
9. How the Ground Truth for the Training Set Was Established
- This is not applicable. See point 8.
Ask a specific question about this device
Page 1 of 1