Search Results
Found 2 results
510(k) Data Aggregation
(24 days)
MODIFICATION TO SILHOUETTE SPINAL FIXATION SYSTEM
When used as a pedicle screw fixation system in skeletally mature patients, the Silhouette™ Spinal Fixation System is intended to provide immobilization and stabilization of spinal segments as an adjunct to fusion in the treatment of the following acute and chronic instabilities or deformities of the thoracic, lumbar, and sacral spine: degenerative spondylolisthesis with objective evidence of neurologic impairment, fracture, dislocation, scoliosis, kyphosis, spinal tumor, and failed previous fusion (pseudarthrosis).
In addition, when used as a pedicle screw fixation system, the Silhouette Spinal Fixation System is indicated for use in patients:
a) having severe spondylolisthesis (Grade 3 and 4) at the L5-S1 joint
b) who are receiving fusions with autogenous graft only
c) who are having the device fixed or attached to the lumbar or sacral spine
d) who are having the device removed after the development of a solid fusion mass
When used as a hook and sacral screw system, the Silhouette Spinal Fixation System is intended for use in the treatment of degenerative disc disease (as defined by chronic back pain of discogenic origin with degeneration of the disc confirmed by history and radiographic studies), idiopathic scoliosis, spondylolisthesis, kyphotic or lordotic deformity of the spine, loss of stability due to tumors, spinal stenosis, vertebral fracture or dislocation, pseudoarthrosis, and previous failed spinal fusion. When used for this indication, screws of the Silhouette Spinal Fixation System are intended for sacral illiac attachment only. Hook and transverse of the Silhouette Spinal Fixation System are intended for posterior thoracic only. As a whole, the levels of use for hook and sacral screw fixation of this system are T1 to the sacrum.
The Silhouette™ Spinal Fixation System is a temporary implant system used to correct spinal deformity and to facilitate the biological process of spinal fusion. This system is intended for posterior use in the thoracic, lumbar, and sacral areas of the spine. Implants in this system consist of hooks and/or screws and are intended to be removed after solid fusion has occurred. The system includes polyaxial screws of varying diameters and lengths; fixed screws of varying diameters and lengths; rods in varying lengths; hooks in varying designs; and transverse connectors in the various configurations of fixed, adjustable, variable angle offset and axial. All implant components are either top loading and top tightening. The implants in this system are manufactured from titanium alloy (Ti-6Al-4V) that conforms to ASTM F-136.
The provided text is a 510(k) Summary for the Silhouette™ Spinal Fixation System, which is a medical device. This type of regulatory submission in the United States focuses on establishing substantial equivalence to a predicate device, rather than proving the device meets specific performance criteria through a clinical study or extensive analytical testing.
Therefore, the supplied document does not contain the information requested regarding acceptance criteria and a study demonstrating that the device meets those criteria. The 510(k) summary primarily addresses:
- Device Description: What the device is and what it's made of.
- Intended Use: The medical conditions and anatomical locations for which the device is designed.
- Statement of Technological Comparison: A qualitative comparison to a legally marketed predicate device, highlighting that the new device has "similar mechanical properties" based on ISO mechanical testing (not clinical or human-in-the-loop studies).
- Regulatory Classification and Predicate Device: Identifies the classification and the previous devices it is substantially equivalent to.
Based on the provided text, here's an analysis of why the requested information cannot be extracted:
-
A table of acceptance criteria and the reported device performance: This information is not found in the summary. The summary mentions "mechanical testing carried out according to ASTM 1717-96 to validate the Variable Angle Connector and the Axial Connector." It states that this testing "demonstrated similar mechanical properties to the previously cleared Silhouette™ Spinal Fixation System components." However, specific acceptance criteria (e.g., minimum tensile strength, maximum displacement) and the exact reported performance values are not detailed.
-
Sample size used for the test set and the data provenance: Not applicable for the type of information provided. The "test set" in this context refers to mechanical test samples, not a clinical data set. The document does not specify the number of components tested for the mechanical validation. Data provenance (country, retrospective/prospective) is relevant for clinical studies, not for internal mechanical testing of device components.
-
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): Not applicable. "Ground truth" and "experts" are terms related to clinical or diagnostic accuracy studies, not mechanical component testing for spinal implants. The ground truth for mechanical testing would be the physical properties measured against industry standards.
-
Adjudication method (e.g., 2+1, 3+1, none) for the test set: Not applicable. Adjudication methods are used in clinical trials or diagnostic studies to resolve discrepancies in expert opinions, which is not relevant to mechanical testing.
-
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. MRMC studies, AI, and human reader performance are entirely unrelated to the mechanical performance of a spinal fixation system.
-
If a standalone (i.e. algorithm only without human-in-the-loop performance) was done: Not applicable. This refers to AI algorithm performance, which is not part of this device's evaluation.
-
The type of ground truth used (expert consensus, pathology, outcomes data, etc.): For the mechanical testing mentioned, the "ground truth" would be established engineering standards (ASTM F-136 for material, ASTM 1717-96 for mechanical testing).
-
The sample size for the training set: Not applicable. Training sets are relevant for machine learning algorithms, which are not involved here.
-
How the ground truth for the training set was established: Not applicable for the same reason as above.
In summary, the provided 510(k) summary focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence through a comparison of device design, materials, and mechanical properties (using ASTM standards) to a predicate device, rather than reporting on clinical performance criteria, diagnostic accuracy, or AI system validation.
Ask a specific question about this device
(86 days)
MODIFICATION TO SILHOUETTE SPINAL FIXATION SYSTEM
When used as a pedicle screw fixation system in skeletally mature patients, the Silhouette™ Spinal Fixation System is intended to provide immobilization and stabilization of spinal segments as an adjunct to fusion in the treatment of the following acute and chronic instabilities or deformities of the thoracic, lumbar, and sacral spine: degenerative spondylolisthesis with objective evidence of neurologic impairment, fracture, dislocation, scoliosis, kyphosis, spinal tumor, and failed previous fusion (pseudarthrosis).
In addition, when used as a pedicle screw fixation system, the Silhouette™ Spinal Fixation System is indicated for use in patients:
- having severe spondylolisthesis (Grade 3 and 4) at the L5-S1 joint a)
- who are receiving fusions with autogenous graft only b)
- who are having the device fixed or attached to the lumbar or sacral spine c)
- who are having the device removed after the development of a solid fusion mass d)
When used as a hook and sacral screw system, the Silhouette™ Spinal Fixation System is intended for use in the treatment of degenerative disc disease (as defined by chronic back pain of discogenic origin with degeneration of the disc confirmed by history and radiographic studies), idiopathic scoliosis, spondylolisthesis, kyphotic deformity of the spine. loss of stability due to tumors, spinal stenosis, vertebral fracture or dislocation. pseudoarthrosis, and previous failed spinal fusion. When used for this indication, screws of the Silhouette™ Spinal Fixation System are intended for sacral iliac attachment only. Hook and transverse connectors of the system are intended for posterior thoracic and/or lumbar use only. As a whole, the levels of use for hook and sacral screw fixation of this system are T1 to the sacrum.
The Silhouette™ Spinal Fixation System is a temporary implant system used to correct spinal deformity and to facilitate the biological process of spinal fusion. This system is intended for posterior use in the thoracic, lumbar, and sacral areas of the spine. Implants in this system consist of hooks and/or screws connected to rods that are intended to be removed after solid fusion has occurred. The system includes polyaxial screws of varying diameters and lengths, fixed screws of varying diameters and lengths, rods in varying lengths, hooks in varying designs, and transverse connectors in fixed widths. All implant components are top loading and top tightening. The implants in this system are manufactured from titanium alloy (Ti-6A1-4V) that conforms to ASTM F-136.
The provided text describes a 510(k) submission for the Silhouette™ Spinal Fixation System. It does not contain information about acceptance criteria or a study proving the device meets said criteria in the context of a typical AI/medical device performance evaluation.
Instead, this document focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence of the Silhouette™ Spinal Fixation System to a predicate device (K980288), primarily based on design, operating principle, materials, shelf life, packaging materials/process, and sterilization. The key change is a modification of labeling to include expanded indications for use, an additional warning, and an additional precaution.
Therefore, many of the requested categories for a typical AI device study are not applicable to this 510(k) submission.
Here's an attempt to extract relevant information and note where the requested information is not present:
1. Table of acceptance criteria and the reported device performance
Acceptance Criteria (Explicitly Stated) | Reported Device Performance |
---|---|
Mechanical Performance Equivalence | Demonstrated equivalent mechanical performance compared to several other commercially available spinal fixation systems. |
Substantial Equivalence to Predicate | The device is identical to the predicate Silhouette™ Spinal Fixation System with regard to design, operating principle, materials, shelf life, packaging materials/process, and sterilization. Raises no new issues of safety or effectiveness. |
2. Sample size used for the test set and the data provenance
- Not applicable / Not specified for human subject data. The "test" in this context refers to biomechanical testing of components, not a clinical trial with a "test set" of patients or data for an AI algorithm.
- The provenance of data for biomechanical testing is not detailed (e.g., country of origin).
3. Number of experts used to establish the ground truth for the test set and the qualifications of those experts
- Not applicable. This submission focuses on hardware equivalence and biomechanical properties, not diagnostic or interpretive tasks where expert ground truth would be established.
4. Adjudication method for the test set
- Not applicable. See point 3.
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
- No. This is not an AI device.
6. If a standalone (i.e. algorithm only without human-in-the-loop performance) was done
- No. This is not an AI device.
7. The type of ground truth used
- Biomechanical testing results: The "ground truth" for this device's performance is based on the results of biomechanical tests comparing its components to other commercially available systems. The specific metrics (e.g., stiffness, fatigue strength) are not detailed but are implied by "equivalent mechanical performance."
- Predicate device's established safety and effectiveness: The ultimate "ground truth" for the overall device approval is its substantial equivalence to a legally marketed predicate device (K980288), which has already established its safety and effectiveness.
8. The sample size for the training set
- Not applicable. This is not an AI device, so there is no "training set."
9. How the ground truth for the training set was established
- Not applicable. This is not an AI device.
Ask a specific question about this device
Page 1 of 1