Search Results

The MX Polvaxial Pedicle Screw is a pedicle screw system intended to provide immobilization and stabilization of spinal segments in skeletally mature patients 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 neurological impairment, fracture, dislocation, scoliosis, kyphosis, spinal tumor, and failed previous fusion (pseudarthrosis).

As a pedicle screw system the MX Polyaxial Pedicle Screws are indicated for the treatment of severe spondylolisthesis (Grades 3 and 4) of the L5-S1 vertebra in skeletally mature patients receiving fusion by autogenous bone graft having implants attached to the lumbar and sacral spine (L3 to sacrum) with removal of the implants after the attainment of a solid fusion.

The MX Polyaxial Pedicle Screw consists of pedicle screws and rods. Pedicle screws are inserted into the pedicles of the vertebrae and are available in three diameters (Ø6.2, Ø7.0 and Ø8.0mm) and in lengths ranging from 35mm to 70mm. A rod is then inserted through an opening in the side of the head of the screw. A set screw is inserted through the top of the screw head. As the set screw is tightened the rod is secured in the screw head and the polyaxial mechanism is fixed in place. The rods are available in lengths ranging from 45-600mm.

The MX is fabricated from material that conforms to ASTM F136 (Ti-6Al-4V alloy).

The provided 510(k) summary for the MX Polyaxial Pedicle Screw describes a medical device, but it does not contain information about acceptance criteria or a study proving device performance in the context of clinical or diagnostic efficacy, which is typically the focus of such questions.

Instead, the document details:

• Device Description: What the device is made of and how it functions mechanically.
• Intended Use: The medical conditions and patient population for which the device is designed.
• Summary of Nonclinical Tests: This explicitly states "Testing was performed per ASTM F1717." ASTM F1717 is a standard for mechanical testing of spinal implants, specifically for spinal implant constructs in a dynamic compression testing environment. This type of testing assesses the structural integrity, fatigue life, and mechanical properties of the device itself, not its clinical performance in patients or a comparison against a diagnostic standard.

Therefore, many of the requested details, such as sample size for test sets, data provenance, expert qualifications, ground truth establishment for a diagnostic study, MRMC studies, or standalone algorithm performance, are not applicable and not present in this document.

Here’s a description of the acceptance criteria and the study as much as can be extracted from the provided text, focusing on the mechanical testing aspect:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

2. Sample Size Used for the Test Set and Data Provenance

• Sample Size for Test Set: Not specified in the document. For mechanical testing per ASTM F1717, the sample size would refer to the number of device constructs tested, not human patient data.
• Data Provenance: Not applicable in the context of clinical or diagnostic data. For mechanical testing, the data would be generated in a laboratory setting.
• Retrospective or Prospective: Not applicable as this relates to clinical studies.

3. Number of Experts Used to Establish Ground Truth for the Test Set and Qualifications

• Not applicable. For mechanical testing, ground truth is established by applying the test standard (ASTM F1717) and measuring physical properties, not by expert consensus on clinical findings.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set

• Not applicable. Adjudication relates to resolving discrepancies in expert interpretations of clinical data.

5. If a Multi-Reader Multi-Case (MRMC) Comparative Effectiveness Study Was Done

• No. This type of study assesses human reader performance, often with and without AI assistance, for diagnostic tasks. The provided document concerns mechanical performance of a spinal implant.

6. If a Standalone (Algorithm Only Without Human-in-the-Loop Performance) Was Done

• No. Standalone performance usually refers to the accuracy of an AI algorithm on its own. This document describes a physical medical device.

7. The Type of Ground Truth Used

• Mechanical Test Standards and Measurements: For the "Summary of Nonclinical Tests," the ground truth is adherence to the specifications and performance requirements outlined in ASTM F1717. This standard provides methodologies and criteria for evaluating the mechanical properties of spinal implant constructs. The device's performance is measured against these established engineering and biomechanical benchmarks.

8. The Sample Size for the Training Set

• Not applicable. Training sets are used for machine learning algorithms. The device is a physical pedicle screw system.

9. How the Ground Truth for the Training Set Was Established

• Not applicable.

In summary, the provided text focuses on the mechanical and material safety/performance of the MX Polyaxial Pedicle Screw, demonstrating its substantial equivalence to predicate devices through compliance with ASTM F1717. It does not contain information related to clinical efficacy studies, diagnostic performance, or AI/software analysis that would involve human subjects, expert review, or machine learning methodologies.

Ask a specific question about this device