Search Results

The Kisses Plus Implant System is indicated for use in partially or fully edentulous mandibles and maxilla, in support of single or multiple-unit restorations including; cemented retained, or overdenture restorations, and terminal or intermediate abutment support for fixed bridgework.

The Kisses Plus Implant System is for single and two stage surgical procedures. It is for delayed loading.

This 510k is to add the following abutments to Kisses Plus Implant System: Multi Straight Abutment, Multi Angled Abutment, CCM Abutment, and Multi CCM Abutment. The description includes details on the material composition (Ti 6A14V ELI or Co Cr Mo) and dimension ranges for each abutment type. It also mentions the abutment screws used with these abutments.

The provided text is a 510(k) summary for a dental implant system (Kisses Plus Implant System) and, as such, focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence to predicate devices rather than reporting on the performance of an AI/ML powered device.

Therefore, the document does not contain any information regarding:

• Acceptance criteria for an AI/ML powered device.
• Study details (e.g., test set sample size, provenance, expert qualifications, adjudication method, MRMC studies, standalone performance, ground truth type, training set details) that would prove an AI/ML device meets specific performance criteria.

The document describes non-clinical testing performed for the Kisses Plus Implant System, which includes:

• Fatigue test in accordance with ISO 14801.
• Biocompatibility tests: Cytotoxicity, Sensitization, and Irritation tests per ISO 10993-5 and ISO 10993-10, with additional leveraging from K172630.
• Steam sterilization validation in accordance with ISO 17665-1 and ISO 17665-2.

These tests are designed to ensure the safety and effectiveness of the physical dental implant components and demonstrate substantial equivalence to predicate devices, not AI/ML performance.

Ask a specific question about this device

The Kisses Plus Implant System is indicated for use in partially or fully edentulous mandibles and maxilla, in support of single or multiple-unit restorations including; cemented retained, screw retained, or overdenture restorations, and terminal or intermediate abutment support for fixed bridgework.

The Kisses Plus Implant System is for single and two stage surgical procedures. It is for delayed loading.

Kisses Plus Implant System offers three different types of implants: Double Hex, and Kisses Single Hex. The Double Hex type has the doubled hex part to be coupled to the superstructure, whereas, the Single Hex type and Kisses Single Hex type has single hex part.

The Double Hex type fixture is a substructure of a dental implant system. It consists of the hex part to be coupled to the superstructure, the macro thread part to be fixed to the bone, and the cutting edge part with the self-tapping function. It offers double hex type.

The Single Hex type fixture is a substructure of a dental implant system. It consists of the hex part to be coupled to the superstructure, the macro thread part to be fixed to the bone, and the cutting edge part with the self-tapping function. It offers single hex type.

The Kisses Single Hex type fixture is a substructure of a dental implant system. It consists of the hex part to be coupled to the superstructure, the macro thread part to be fixed to the bone, and the cutting edge part with the self-tapping function. It offers single hex type.

Kisses Plus Implant System also includes the following components: Angled abutment, Duplex Abutment, Duplex Milling Abutment, Simplex Abutment, Temporary Abutment, Solid Screw Abutment, Ball Abutment, Ball Cap, Cover Screw, Healing Abutment.

The provided document is a 510(k) premarket notification for a medical device, the "Kisses Plus Implant System," and as such, it focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence to predicate devices rather than providing a detailed study proving the device meets specific acceptance criteria in the manner one might find for a novel diagnostic AI algorithm.

Therefore, much of the requested information regarding acceptance criteria, specific performance metrics, sample sizes for test/training sets, expert involvement, and ground truth types are not applicable or not explicitly detailed in this type of regulatory submission for a dental implant system.

Instead, the document details physical and functional characteristics to show that the new device is as safe and effective as existing, legally marketed devices.

Here's an attempt to answer your questions based on the provided text, indicating where information is not available:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

The document does not present a table of acceptance criteria with corresponding device performance metrics in the way you might expect for a diagnostic AI. Instead, it compares the subject device's characteristics to those of predicate devices to establish substantial equivalence. The "performance" here refers to meeting safety and effectiveness standards through material composition, design similarities, and successful non-clinical testing.

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

• Sample Size for Test Set: Not explicitly stated in terms of a "test set" for performance evaluation of an AI algorithm. The non-clinical tests (e.g., fatigue, rotational shear strength) inherently involve a sample size of physical devices, but the specific number tested for each criterion is not detailed.
• Data Provenance: Not applicable as this is a physical medical device, not an AI algorithm processing patient data. The tests were likely conducted in a controlled laboratory environment.

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

• Not Applicable. This is a physical dental implant device, not a diagnostic algorithm requiring expert-established ground truth from medical images or patient data. The "ground truth" for this device's performance is established through engineering standards, material specifications, and mechanical testing.

4. Adjudication method for the test set

• Not Applicable. This is a physical dental implant device, not a diagnostic algorithm where adjudication of results by multiple experts would typically occur. The non-clinical tests are performed according to established standards.

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

• Not Applicable. This is a physical dental implant device and does not involve human readers or AI assistance in the context of diagnostic interpretation.

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

• Not Applicable. This is a physical dental implant device, not an algorithm.

7. The type of ground truth used

• Engineering Standards and Specifications: The "ground truth" for the performance of this dental implant is based on established international standards (e.g., ISO, ASTM), material properties, and the demonstrated performance of its predicate devices. The non-clinical tests verify that the device meets these engineering and safety benchmarks.

8. The sample size for the training set

• Not Applicable. This is a physical dental implant device, not an AI algorithm that requires a training set.

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

• Not Applicable. This is a physical dental implant device, not an AI algorithm that requires a training set with established ground truth.

Ask a specific question about this device