Search Results

The Nicolet Electrocautery Detector is an accessory device supporting muting of external audible outputs when electrocautery interference is detected.

The Nicolet Electrocautery Detector interfaces between the auditory signal output from a nerve monitor and the nerve monitor's external speaker. The Electrocautery Detector automatically mutes the nerve monitor speaker when electrocautery interference is detected.

The Nicolet Electrocautery Detector is an accessory device designed to mute external audible outputs from a nerve monitor when electrocautery interference is detected. The device's performance is compared to a predicate device, the XOMED NIM-2 XL.

Here's an analysis based on the provided text:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

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

The provided summary does not contain information regarding a specific "test set" in the context of clinical trials or performance testing with human subjects. The comparison is based on device specifications and features, not a study involving a particular sample size of cases or patients. The data provenance is derived from the technical specifications and design of the Nicolet Electrocautery Detector and its predicate device. This is a comparison of product specifications, not a clinical study.

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

Since there is no mention of a "test set" for a clinical study or performance evaluation with human data, there is no information on the number of experts or their qualifications used to establish ground truth.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set

As there is no mention of a "test set" involving expert review of cases, there is no information on an adjudication method.

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

The document does not describe an MRMC comparative effectiveness study. This device is an accessory for a nerve monitor, designed to automatically mute auditory signals, not an AI-based diagnostic tool requiring human reader interpretation or improvement. Therefore, there is no information on an effect size for human reader improvement with or without AI assistance.

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

The document does not describe a standalone algorithm performance study. The device functions as an accessory that performs an automated action (muting) based on detecting electrocautery interference. The "performance" is implicitly evaluated by comparing its technical specifications (like recovery time and detection method) to those of the predicate device.

7. The Type of Ground Truth Used

The "ground truth" in this context is the technical specifications and functional design of the device and its predicate. The assessment is made by comparing these attributes, particularly the method of electrocautery detection and muting, and key performance parameters like recovery time. There is no mention of ground truth established by expert consensus, pathology, or outcomes data in a clinical trial setting.

8. The Sample Size for the Training Set

The provided document does not mention a "training set". This type of device, an electro-mechanical accessory, is not typically developed using machine learning or AI models that require a training set of data. Its functionality is based on detecting physical RF energy.

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

Since there is no mention of a training set, there is no information on how ground truth for a training set was established.

Ask a specific question about this device