Search Filters

Search Results

Found 1 results

510(k) Data Aggregation

    K Number
    K070583
    Device Name
    NANO COMPOSITE
    Manufacturer
    Date Cleared
    2007-04-16

    (46 days)

    Product Code
    Regulation Number
    872.3690
    Panel
    Dental
    Reference & Predicate Devices
    Why did this record match?
    Device Name :

    NANO COMPOSITE

    AI/MLSaMDIVD (In Vitro Diagnostic)TherapeuticDiagnosticis PCCP AuthorizedThirdpartyExpeditedreview
    Intended Use

    NANO COMPOSITE is designed for Class I-V dental restorations, direct veneering of anterior teeth, splinting, and repair of composite or ceramic restorations.

    Device Description

    Cosmedent NANO COMPOSITE is a light-cure composite resin fabricated from difunctional acrylic monomers and silicaceous fillers. These materials possess physical and mechanical properties that allow them to function in the oral cavity with esthetic qualities that mimic natural tooth appearance.

    AI/ML Overview

    The provided text is a 510(k) summary for a dental composite material, not an AI/ML device. Therefore, the questions related to AI/ML device performance, such as sample sizes for test/training sets, ground truth establishment, expert adjudication, or MRMC studies, are not applicable.

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

    1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

    The acceptance criteria are implicitly defined by demonstrating substantial equivalence to the predicate device, Tetric EvoCeram. This involves comparing key physical and mechanical properties.

    PropertyAcceptance Criteria (Predicate: Tetric EvoCeram)Reported Device Performance (Cosmedent NANO COMPOSITE)
    Compressive strength313 MPa400 MPa
    Flexural strength120 MPa125 MPa
    Modulus of elasticity9500 MPa12000 MPa
    RadiopaqueYesYes

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

    Not applicable. This is a material comparison study, not an AI/ML diagnostic study with a "test set" in that context. The data would have been generated from laboratory testing of the material. The document does not specify the sample sizes (e.g., number of specimens tested for each property) or data provenance in terms of country of origin, or if it was retrospective or prospective.

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

    Not applicable. Ground truth in the context of AI/ML diagnostics for medical images is not relevant here. The "ground truth" for material properties is established through standardized laboratory testing methods.

    4. Adjudication method for the test set

    Not applicable. No expert adjudication is described for material property testing.

    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 not an AI/ML diagnostic device.

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

    Not applicable. This is not an AI/ML diagnostic device.

    7. The type of ground truth used

    The "ground truth" for the device's performance is based on the results of physical and mechanical properties testing performed according to implied standard laboratory methods.

    8. The sample size for the training set

    Not applicable. This is not an AI/ML 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/ML device.

    Ask a Question

    Ask a specific question about this device

    Page 1 of 1