Search Results

3i dental implants are indicated for surgical placement in the upper or lower jaw to provide a means for prosthetic attachment.

The 3 i IOLTM Dental Implants are offered in both externally hexed and internally connected designs. The devices are tapered implants designed to mimic the shape and form of a natural tooth.

The provided document, K031632 for the 3i IOL™ Dental Implants, is a 510(k) Premarket Notification. This type of submission focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence to a legally marketed predicate device, rather than detailed clinical performance studies with specific acceptance criteria as you might find for a PMA (Pre-Market Approval).

Therefore, much of the requested information regarding acceptance criteria, sample sizes for test/training sets, expert qualifications, adjudication methods, MRMC studies, and standalone performance studies is not explicitly present or applicable in this type of regulatory document.

Here's what can be extracted and inferred based on the provided text:

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

The document does not specify quantitative acceptance criteria. Instead, it relies on demonstrating substantial equivalence to predicate devices. The "performance" described is in terms of the device's characteristics being "similar" to these predicate devices.

2. Sample size used for the test set and the data provenance (e.g. country of origin of the data, retrospective or prospective)

• Sample Size for Test Set: Not applicable/not provided. This 510(k) does not present a clinical test set with performance data.
• Data Provenance: Not applicable/not provided.

3. 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/not provided. Ground truth establishment with experts is typically associated with performance studies, which are not detailed here.

4. Adjudication method (e.g. 2+1, 3+1, none) for the test set

• Not applicable/not provided.

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/not provided. This is a dental implant, not an imaging AI device.

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

• Not applicable/not provided. This is a physical medical device, not an algorithm.

7. The type of ground truth used (expert consensus, pathology, outcomes data, etc)

• Not applicable/not provided in the context of a performance study. The "ground truth" for this 510(k) is the successful long-term performance and safety of the predicate devices to which the 3i IOL™ Dental Implants are compared.

8. The sample size for the training set

• Not applicable/not provided. This document does not describe an AI/ML device that requires a training set.

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

• Not applicable/not provided.

Summary of the Study that Proves the Device Meets Acceptance Criteria:

The "study" or evidence provided in this K031632 510(k) filing for the 3i IOL™ Dental Implants is the demonstration of substantial equivalence to several legally marketed predicate devices. The core argument is:

• The 3i IOL™ Dental Implants are designed for surgical placement in the upper or lower jaw for prosthetic attachment.
• They are available in externally hexed and internally connected designs and are tapered to mimic natural teeth.
• Crucially, the document states: "The 3i IOL Dental Implants contain features and functions which are similar to the currently available OSSEOTITE NT Implants and 3i Innovative Implants and Cover Screws."

The FDA's decision to clear the device implies they agreed with the submitter's assertion that the new device shares sufficient technological characteristics and indications for use with the predicate devices to be considered "substantially equivalent" in terms of safety and effectiveness, without requiring new clinical performance data. The listed predicate devices (K014235, K972444, K935544, K980549, K983347, K022009) serve as the existing proof of concept and safety/effectiveness for similar designs and functionalities.

Ask a specific question about this device