Search Results

The Hydrophilic Guidewire is indicated for general intravascular use to aid in the selective placement of catheters in the peripheral, visceral and cerebral vasculature during diagnostic and/or therapeutic procedures.

The Hydrophilic Guidewire is a stainless-steel guidewire with a radiopaque, platinum distal coil. The guidewire has a hydrophilic coating that spans the distal 170 cm. Included within the sterile pouch is a pin vise to assist in guidewire manipulation and an introducer needle to ease the introduction of the guidewire into the catheter hub and/or hemostasis valve.

The provided text describes the 510(k) premarket notification for the Mirage™ and X-pedion™ Hydrophilic Guidewires, asserting their substantial equivalence to a predicate device. The information primarily focuses on bench testing rather than AI/ML algorithm performance. Therefore, many of the requested details, such as those related to AI model training, expert ground truth, and human reader studies, are not applicable or cannot be extracted from this document.

Here's the relevant information based on the provided text:

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

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

The document does not specify the exact sample sizes (number of guidewires) used for each bench test. The data provenance is from non-clinical bench testing conducted by Micro Therapeutics, Inc. d/b/a ev3 Neurovascular (the applicant).

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 medical device clearance based on substantial equivalence demonstrated through non-clinical bench testing, not an AI/ML algorithm requiring expert-established ground truth. The "ground truth" for these tests would be the physical properties and performance measurements of the guidewires against engineering specifications.

4. Adjudication method for the test set

Not applicable, as this is bench testing of physical device properties, not a study involving human interpretation of data where adjudication would be necessary.

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 document is for a physical medical guidewire, not an AI-powered diagnostic or assistive tool. No MRMC study was conducted or mentioned.

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

Not applicable. This is for a physical medical guidewire.

7. The type of ground truth used

The "ground truth" for the bench tests would be the physical and mechanical specifications for guidewires, as referenced by standards such as ISO 11070 and USP , as well as internal quality procedures (QP50324, TM0047). The tests evaluated observed performance against these predefined criteria.

8. The sample size for the training set

Not applicable. There is no training set for a physical medical device.

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

Not applicable. There is no training set for a physical medical device.

Ask a specific question about this device

The Hydrophilic Guidewire is indicated for general intravascular use to aid in the selective placement of catheters in the peripheral, visceral and cerebral vasculature during diagnostic and/or therapeutic procedures.

The Hydrophilic Guidewire is a stainless-steel guidewire with a radiopaque, platinum distal coil. The guidewire has a hydrophilic coating that spans the distal 170 cm. Included within the sterile pouch is a pin vise to assist in guidewire manipulation and an introducer needle to ease the introduction of the guidewire into the catheter hub and/or hemostasis valve.

The provided text describes the 510(k) premarket notification for the Mirage™ Hydrophilic Guidewire and X-pedion™ Hydrophilic Guidewire. This document primarily focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence to a predicate device through non-clinical (bench and biocompatibility) testing, rather than a study on an AI/ML-based medical device.

Therefore, the information required to answer most of your questions about acceptance criteria for an AI/ML device, sample sizes for AI test sets, expert ground truthing, MRMC studies, standalone performance, training sets, and ground truth establishment for AI/ML models is not present in this document.

However, I can extract information related to the acceptance criteria and performance data for the physical medical device as described:

Acceptance Criteria and Device Performance (Based on Non-Clinical Bench Testing):

The document details numerous non-clinical bench tests performed to demonstrate the safety and performance of the guidewires. The results consistently state that "The Mirage™ and X-pedion™ Hydrophilic Guidewires met the acceptance criteria for [Test Name]."

Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance (Non-Clinical):

Since this is a 510(k) submission for a non-AI/ML medical device, the following information is not applicable or not provided in the document:

1. Sample sizes used for the test set and the data provenance: Not an AI device, so no "test set" in the AI sense. Bench tests follow specific standards, implying sample sizes per those standards, but not explicitly stated here.
2. Number of experts used to establish the ground truth for the test set and the qualifications of those experts: Not applicable; ground truth for a physical device is established via standardized physical and chemical tests, not expert human interpretation of data for AI.
3. Adjudication method for the test set: Not applicable for non-AI bench testing.
4. If a multi reader multi case (MRMC) comparative effectiveness study was done: Not applicable.
5. If a standalone (i.e. algorithm only without human-in-the-loop performance) was done: Not applicable.
6. The type of ground truth used: For a physical guidewire, "ground truth" is typically defined by adherence to engineering specifications, material properties, and performance under simulated clinical conditions, verified through empirical testing following established ISO and USP standards.
7. The sample size for the training set: Not applicable; this is not an AI/ML device.
8. How the ground truth for the training set was established: Not applicable; this is not an AI/ML device.

In summary, this document is a regulatory submission for a physical medical device demonstrating substantial equivalence, not an AI/ML device requiring clinical validation for diagnostic or prognostic purposes.

Ask a specific question about this device

Ask a specific question about this device