Search Filters

Search Results

Found 1 results

510(k) Data Aggregation

    K Number
    K180565
    Manufacturer
    Date Cleared
    2018-06-13

    (100 days)

    Product Code
    Regulation Number
    872.3660
    Panel
    Dental
    Reference & Predicate Devices
    Predicate For
    N/A
    AI/MLSaMDIVD (In Vitro Diagnostic)TherapeuticDiagnosticis PCCP AuthorizedThirdpartyExpeditedreview
    Intended Use

    this device is to be used as a heavy body material for:

    • · Two step putty/wash technique
    • · Sigle step putty/wash technique
    • · Functional peripheries
    • Crown/bridge work
    Device Description

    Vinyl polysiloxane is an addition-reaction silicone elastomer (an addition silicone). It is a viscous liquid that cures quickly into a rubber-like solid, taking the shape of conforming to tooth's shape surface it was lying against while curing. As with 2-part epoxy, its package keeps its 2 component liquids in separate container until the moment they are mixed and applied, because once mixed, they cure (harden) rapidly.
    To create the material, the user mixes the base with the catalyst, and the chemical reaction begins. Once the impression material is set and modified, it is taken to patient"s mouth for use in the transfer bonding process.

    AI/ML Overview

    The provided text is a 510(k) summary for a dental impression material (PEAK NS033CF, PEAK NS017CF). It focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence to a previously cleared predicate device, rather than providing a detailed study proving the device meets specific acceptance criteria in the manner of a diagnostic medical device.

    Therefore, much of the requested information regarding acceptance criteria, study design, expert involvement, and ground truth establishment cannot be found in this document because the premarket notification for this type of device does not typically require such detailed clinical study information.

    Here's a breakdown of what can be extracted and what is missing:


    1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

    The acceptance criteria for this device are based on compliance with international standards for dental impression materials and biocompatibility. The "reported device performance" section primarily states that the new device meets these standards, rather than providing specific numerical performance metrics.

    Acceptance Criteria (Standard / Test)Reported Device Performance
    ISO 10993-5 (Cytotoxicity)Compliant (Biocompatible)
    ISO 10993-10 (Skin Irritation, Sensitization)Compliant (Biocompatible)
    ISO 4823:2015 (Dentistry - Elastomeric Impression Materials)Compliant (Technological characteristics including setting time, consistency, elastic recovery, strain-in-compression are similar to predicate and meet standard).

    2. Sample Size for the Test Set and Data Provenance

    Not provided in the document. The document states that performance and biocompatibility tests were carried out, but it does not specify the sample sizes or the provenance of the data (e.g., country of origin, retrospective/prospective nature). These tests would typically be laboratory-based rather than involving human subjects for effectiveness testing in the way a diagnostic AI would.


    3. Number of Experts Used to Establish Ground Truth and Qualifications

    Not applicable/Not provided in the document. For a dental impression material, "ground truth" would relate to its physical and chemical properties and biocompatibility as measured in laboratory settings against established standards, not interpretation by human experts in a diagnostic context.


    4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set

    Not applicable/Not provided in the document. Adjudication methods like 2+1 or 3+1 are typically used for clinical diagnostic studies where multiple readers interpret cases and their consensus defines ground truth. This is not relevant for the type of testing described for an impression material.


    5. Multi-Reader Multi-Case (MRMC) Comparative Effectiveness Study

    Not applicable/Not done. An MRMC study is relevant for diagnostic devices that assist human readers (e.g., AI for radiology). This device is a dental impression material, not a diagnostic AI.


    6. Standalone (Algorithm Only Without Human-in-the-Loop) Performance Study

    Not applicable/Not done. This concept applies to AI algorithms. The device in question is a physical material.


    7. Type of Ground Truth Used

    The "ground truth" for this device's performance is established by international standards (ISO 4823:2015 for physical properties and ISO 10993-5, ISO 10993-10 for biocompatibility). This involves objective measurements and tests according to the methodologies defined by these standards, rather than expert consensus, pathology, or outcomes data in a clinical sense.


    8. Sample Size for the Training Set

    Not applicable/Not provided in the document. The concept of a "training set" applies to machine learning algorithms. This device is a physical product, not an AI.


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

    Not applicable/Not provided in the document. As stated above, this device does not involve a training set for an AI algorithm.

    Ask a Question

    Ask a specific question about this device

    Page 1 of 1