Search Filters

Search Results

Found 3 results

510(k) Data Aggregation

    Why did this record match?
    Device Name :

    Tornier Humeral Reconstruction System (Tornier HRS); Tornier Perform Humeral System - Stem (Tornier PHS-Stem

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

    Tornier Humeral Reconstruction System (Tornier HRS)

    IN ANATOMIC:
    The Tornier HRS is to be used only in patients with an intact or reconstructable rotator cuff, where it is intended to provide increased mobility and stability and to relieve pain. The Tomier HRS is indicated for use as a replacement of shoulder joints disabled by:

    • · Rheumatoid arthritis with pain
    • · Non-inflammatory degenerative joint disease (i.e. osteoarthritis and avascular necrosis)
    • · Correction of functional deformity
    • · Fractures of the humeral head
    • · Traumatic arthritis
    • · Revision of other devices if sufficient bone stock remains

    IN REVERSE:
    The Tornier HRS is indicated for use as a replacement of shoulder joints for patients with a functional deltoid muscle with pain disabled by:

    • · Rheumatoid arthritis
    • · Non-inflammatory degenerative joint disease (i.e. osteoarthritis and avascular necrosis)
    • · Correction of functional deformity
    • · Fractures of the humeral head
    • · Traumatic arthritis
    • · Massive and non-repairable rotator cuff tear
    • · Revision of other devices if sufficient bone stock remains

    The reversed tray and polyethyiene inset are in the conversion from an anatomic to reversed shoulder arthroplasty without the removal of the humeral assembly during revision surgery for patients with a functional deltoid muscle.

    Notes:

    • · All components are single use.
    • · The coated humeral stem is intended for cemented or cementless use.
    • · The all-poly glenoid components are intended for cemented use only
    • · The glenoid sphere implant is anchored to the bone with screws and is for non-cemented fixation.
    • · Titanium humeral heads are intended for patients with suspected cobalt alloy material sensitivity.
    • The wear properties of Titanium and Titanium alloys are inferior to that of cobalt alloy. A Titanium humeral head is not recommended for patients who lack a suspected material sensitivity to cobalt alloy.

    Tornier Perform Humeral System - Stem (Tornier PHS-Stem)

    In Anatomic:
    The humeral stem, humeral head coupler and humeral head may be used by themselves, as a hemiarthroplasty, if the natural glenoid provides a sufficient bearing surface, or in conjunction with a glenoid implant, as a total replacement.

    The PERFORM™ Humeral System – Stem is to be used only in patients with an intact or reconstructable rotator cuff, where it is intended to provide increased mobility, and to relieve pain. The PERFORM Humeral System - Stem is indicated for use as a replacement of shoulder joints disabled by:
    · Non-inflammatory degenerative joint disease (i.e. osteoarthritis) and avascular necrosis

    • · Proximal humeral malunions
    • · Post-traumatic arthritis
    • · Revisions or fractures of the humeral head where adequate fixation can be achieved and adequate bone stock remains

    Titanium humeral heads are intents with suspected cobalt alloy material sensitivity. The wear properties of titanium and titanium alloys are inferior to that of cobalt alloy. A titanium humeral head is recommended for patients with a suspected material sensitivity to cobalt alloy.

    All components are single use. The humeral stems are intended for cementless use.

    The PERFORM Humeral System – Stem is intended to be used with cemented components, in a total shoulder arthroplasty.

    In Reverse:
    The PERFORM™ Humeral System – Stem is indicated for use as a replacement of a shoulder joint for patients with a functional deltoid muscle, grossly deficient rotator cuff, and pain disabled by one or more of the following:
    · Non-inflammatory degenerative joint disease (i.e. osteoarthritis) and avascular necrosis

    • · Pseudoparalysis or anterior superior escape
    • · Rotator cuff tear arthropathy
    • · Proximal humeral malunions
    • · Post-traumatic arthritis
      · Revisions or fractures of the humere adequate fixation can be achieved and adequate bone stock remains

    The reversed insert is indicated for use for the conversion from an anatomic to reverse shoulder prosthesis without the removal of a well fixed humeral stem for patients with a functional deltoid muscle.

    All components are single use. The humeral stems are intended for cementless use. The PERFORM Humeral System – Stem is intended to be used with glenoid implants that are anchored to the bone with screws for non-cemented fixation.

    Device Description

    Tornier HRS (formerly branded Aequalis Flex Revive Shoulder System) is a fully convertible anatomic and reversed shoulder arthroplasty system that is designed to be used with existing Tornier implant systems. It is a non-constrained system intended for total or partial replacement of the glenohumeral articulation.

    The Tornier Humeral Reconstruction System (Tornier HRS) is a line existing Aequalis™ Flex Revive™ Shoulder System (AFR) (K191318, cleared June 14, 2019) that builds upon the AFR system with additional sized distal stems, proximal bodies, and reversed insert trays, new monoblock stems, humeral head couplers and MR Conditional labeling for Tornier HRS line extension components.

    The Tornier Perform Humeral System (Tornier PHS-Stem) (K2013 15) is also being expanded to include additional sized Vitamin E UHMWPE reversed inserts and a renaming of these inserts for clarity.

    AI/ML Overview

    This is a 510(k) Premarket Notification from the FDA for a medical device called the Tornier Humeral Reconstruction System (Tornier HRS) and the Tornier Perform Humeral System - Stem (Tornier PHS-Stem). This document focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence to previously cleared predicate devices, rather than establishing new acceptance criteria and proving performance against them through a clinical study.

    Therefore, the sections of your request regarding acceptance criteria, study details, expert consensus, and effects size are not applicable (N/A) in this context. The primary evidence presented here is non-clinical testing to show that the modified device and its extensions are as safe and effective as the predicate devices.

    Here's a breakdown based on the provided document:

    1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance:

    Acceptance Criteria (N/A - Not a de novo device, relies on substantial equivalence)Reported Device Performance (Non-Clinical Testing)
    N/ADemonstrated substantial equivalence to predicate devices.
    N/APassed Fatigue testing with corrosion evaluation.
    N/APassed Locking mechanism fatigue testing.
    N/APassed Pull-out and torque-out testing.
    N/APassed Wear and range of motion testing.
    N/APassed Material characterization testing.
    N/APassed Biocompatibility evaluation.
    N/APassed Packaging and shelf-life evaluations.
    N/APassed Distribution testing.
    N/APassed Sterilization evaluation.
    N/APassed Endotoxin testing.
    N/APassed MRI compatibility evaluation.
    N/APassed System Compatibility Testing.

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

    • Test Set Sample Size: Not applicable. The document refers to "non-clinical testing," which typically involves bench testing of components and assemblies, not human subjects.
    • Data Provenance: Not applicable. The testing is described as non-clinical performance testing, likely conducted in a laboratory setting by the manufacturer.

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

    • Number of Experts: Not applicable. This type of non-clinical testing does not involve establishing ground truth from expert consensus in the way a diagnostic AI would. The "ground truth" is determined by established engineering and material science standards and test methods.
    • Qualifications of Experts: N/A.

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

    • Adjudication Method: Not applicable. Adjudication methods like 2+1 or 3+1 are used for human expert review in clinical studies or for establishing ground truth in diagnostic performance evaluations, which is not what occurred here.

    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:

    • MRMC Study: No. The document explicitly states: "No clinical studies were performed."
    • Effect Size: Not applicable.

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

    • Standalone Performance: Not applicable. This is a physical orthopedic implant system, not a software algorithm or AI device.

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

    • Type of Ground Truth: Not applicable. For non-clinical performance testing of medical devices, "ground truth" in the diagnostic sense is not typically generated. Instead, performance is measured against established engineering specifications, material properties, and mechanical limits as defined by relevant standards (e.g., ISO, ASTM).

    8. The sample size for the training set:

    • Training Set Sample Size: Not applicable. This is not a machine learning or AI device that requires a training set.

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

    • Ground Truth for Training Set: Not applicable. This is not a machine learning or AI device.
    Ask a Question

    Ask a specific question about this device

    K Number
    K220418
    Manufacturer
    Date Cleared
    2022-09-14

    (212 days)

    Product Code
    Regulation Number
    888.3660
    Reference & Predicate Devices
    Why did this record match?
    Device Name :

    Tornier Perform Humeral System – Stemless

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

    The nucleus, humeral head coupler and humeral head are used in conjunction with a glenoid implant as a total replacement.

    The Tornier Perform® Humeral System - Stemless is to be used only in patients with an intact or reconstructable rotator cuff, where it is intended to provide mobility, stability, and to relieve pain. The Tornier Perform Humeral System -Stemless is indicated for use as a replacement of shoulder joints disabled by:

    • · Non-inflammatory degenerative joint disease (i.e. osteoarthritis) and avascular necrosis
    • · Post-traumatic arthritis

    Titanium humeral heads are intended for patients with suspected cobalt alloy material sensitivity. The wear properties of titanium and titanium alloys are inferior to that of cobalt alloy. A titanium humeral head is not recommended for patients without a suspected material sensitivity to cobalt alloy.

    All components are single use and intended for cementless use.

    The Tornier Perform Humeral System - Stemless is intended to be used with cemented polyethylene glenoid components, in an anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty.

    Device Description

    The Tornier Perform Humeral System - Stemless is metaphyseal humeral system intended for anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty. The Perform Humeral System - Stemless is implanted with existing Tornier anatomic glenoid systems.

    The Tornier Perform Humeral System – Stemless includes new titanium nucleus components and previously-cleared modular humeral heads (K201315). The system also includes reusable instruments used to implant the shoulder prosthesis.

    AI/ML Overview

    The provided document is a 510(k) premarket notification for a medical device, the Tornier Perform Humeral System - Stemless. This type of submission focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence to a predicate device through non-clinical testing rather than clinical studies proving acceptance criteria through device performance.

    Therefore, the requested information on acceptance criteria and a study proving the device meets those criteria, specifically concerning human performance, is largely not applicable to this document. The document explicitly states: "No clinical studies were performed."

    However, I can extract information about the non-clinical testing performed to demonstrate substantial equivalence, which serves a similar purpose in the context of a 510(k) by showing the device performs comparably to an already cleared device.

    Here's a breakdown of the available information based on your request:

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

    Since no clinical studies were performed to establish performance against pre-defined acceptance criteria in terms of human-in-the-loop performance or diagnostic accuracy, such a table cannot be created from this document. The document focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence to an existing predicate device through non-clinical performance testing.

    The types of "performance" mentioned are related to mechanical and material properties:

    Acceptance Criteria (Implied by equivalence to predicate)Reported Device Performance (as demonstrated by non-clinical testing)
    Fatigue Resistance (Comparable to predicate device)Fatigue testing performed. (Specific results not detailed in this summary, but presumed to meet standards for equivalence.)
    Displacement under load (Comparable to predicate device)Displacement finite element analysis performed. (Specific results not detailed.)
    Static Nucleus Strength (Comparable to predicate device)Comparative static nucleus testing performed. (Specific results not detailed.)
    Taper Integrity (Comparable to predicate device)Static taper evaluation performed. (Specific results not detailed.)
    Wear Properties (Comparable to predicate device; with caveat for titanium)Wear and range of motion evaluations performed. (Specific results not detailed. Noted: "The wear properties of titanium and titanium alloys are inferior to that of cobalt alloy. A titanium humeral head is not recommended for patients without a suspected material sensitivity to cobalt alloy.")
    MRI Safety/Compatibility (Compatible with MRI)MRI compatibility evaluation performed. (Specific protocol or limits not detailed.)
    Particulate Release (Acceptable levels)Particulate testing performed. (Specific results not detailed.)
    Biocompatibility (Biocompatible)Assessed in accordance with recognized consensus standards.
    Sterilization Efficacy (Sterile)Assessed in accordance with recognized consensus standards.
    Cleaning Efficacy (Clean)Assessed in accordance with recognized consensus standards.
    Endotoxin Levels (Safe)Assessed in accordance with recognized consensus standards.
    Packaging Integrity (Maintains sterility/integrity)Assessed in accordance with recognized consensus standards.
    Shelf Life Stability (Stable over intended shelf life)Assessed in accordance with recognized consensus standards.
    Distribution Safety (Safe for distribution)Assessed in accordance with recognized consensus standards.

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

    Not applicable. No "test set" in the context of clinical or AI performance evaluation was used. The testing was non-clinical (laboratory/mechanical).

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

    Not applicable. No "ground truth" for a test set based on expert review was established or required for this type of submission focused on mechanical device equivalence.

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

    Not applicable. No "test set" requiring adjudication by experts was used.

    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 a mechanical orthopedic implant, not an AI-assisted diagnostic or therapeutic device that would involve human "readers" or AI assistance in that context.

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

    Not applicable. This is a mechanical orthopedic implant, not an algorithm or AI.

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

    Not applicable. The "ground truth" for the non-clinical tests would have been established engineering specifications, material standards, and performance of the predicate device.

    8. The sample size for the training set:

    Not applicable. This is a mechanical orthopedic implant, not an AI or algorithm that requires a training set.

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

    Not applicable.

    Ask a Question

    Ask a specific question about this device

    K Number
    K201315
    Manufacturer
    Date Cleared
    2020-09-11

    (116 days)

    Product Code
    Regulation Number
    888.3660
    Reference & Predicate Devices
    Why did this record match?
    Device Name :

    PERFORM Humeral System – Stem

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

    In Anatomic:
    The humeral stem, humeral head coupler and humeral head may be used by themselves, as a hemiarthroplasty, if the natural glenoid provides a sufficient bearing surface, or in conjunction with a glenoid implant, as a total replacement.

    The PERFORM™ Humeral System – Stem is to be used only in patients with an intact or reconstructable rotator cuff, where it is intended to provide increased mobility, stability, and to relieve pain. The PERFORM Humeral System – Stem is indicated for use as a replacement of shoulder joints disabled by:

    • Non-inflammatory degenerative joint disease (i.e. osteoarthritis) and avascular necrosis .
    • Correction of functional deformity
    • Post-traumatic arthritis 0
    • o Revisions or fractures of the humeral head where adequate fixation can be achieved and adequate bone stock remains

    Titanium humeral heads are intended for patients with suspected cobalt alloy material sensitivity. The wear properties of titanium and titanium alloys are inferior to that of cobalt alloy. A titanium humeral head is not recommended for patients without a suspected material sensitivity to cobalt alloy.

    All components are single use. The humeral stems are intended for cementless use.

    The PERFORM Humeral System – Stem is intended to be used with cemented polyethylene glenoid components, in a total shoulder arthroplasty.

    In Reverse:
    The PERFORM™ Humeral System - Stem is indicated for use as a replacement of a shoulder joint for patients with a functional deltoid muscle, grossly deficient rotator cuff, and pain disabled by one or more of the following:

    • o Non-inflammatory degenerative joint disease (i.e. osteoarthritis) and avascular necrosis
    • Pseudoparalysis or anterior superior escape ●
    • Rotator cuff tear arthropathy
    • Correction of functional deformity
    • Post-traumatic arthritis
    • o Revisions or fractures of the humeral head where adequate fixation can be achieved and adequate bone stock remains

    The reversed insert is indicated for use for the conversion from an anatomic to reverse shoulder prosthesis without the removal of a well fixed humeral stem for patients with a functional deltoid muscle.

    All components are single use. The humeral stems are intended for cemented or cementless use. The PERFORM Humeral System – Stem is intended to be used with glenoid implants that are anchored to the bone with screws for non-cemented fixation.

    Device Description

    The PERFORM Humeral System - Stem is an inlay convertible humeral system intended for anatomic, reverse, and hemiarthroplasty of the shoulder system also allows for conversion from an anatomic to a reverse shoulder prosthesis in the case of revision. The PERFORM Humeral System - Stem is implanted with existing Tornier glenoid systems for total anatomic and reverse shoulder arthroplasty.

    The PERFORM Humeral System – Stem includes titanium humeral stems, cobalt chrome and titanium humeral heads, titanium humeral head couplers, conventional and Vitamin E UHMWPE reversed inserts, and titanium humeral spacers. The system also includes reusable instruments used to implant the shoulder prosthesis.

    AI/ML Overview

    This FDA 510(k) summary describes the Tornier PERFORM™ Humeral System - Stem, a shoulder prosthesis. The document does not describe an AI/ML powered device, therefore, the requested information cannot be fully provided.

    However, based on the provided text, here is what can be extracted regarding the device (a physical medical implant) and its non-clinical performance testing:

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

    The document does not provide a table with specific quantitative acceptance criteria or reported device performance values in a comparative format. Instead, it lists the types of non-clinical performance testing conducted to support substantial equivalence to a predicate device.

    Test TypePurpose/Standard(s)Relationship to Acceptance Criteria/Performance
    Fatigue testingNot explicitly stated, but typically assesses the device's ability to withstand repeated stress without failure."Non-clinical testing was performed to demonstrate substantial equivalence to the predicate device." Implies that the device met fatigue requirements comparable to the predicate. Specific acceptance criteria (e.g., number of cycles at a certain load) and reported performance are not detailed.
    Static taper evaluationASTM F2009"Non-clinical testing was performed to demonstrate substantial equivalence to the predicate device." Implies compliance with the standard for static taper evaluation. Specific acceptance criteria and reported performance (e.g., pull-off strength, torque values) are not detailed.
    Static Reversed Insert testingNot explicitly stated what standard or specific aspects are tested, but likely related to the mechanical integrity and stability of the reversed insert."Non-clinical testing was performed to demonstrate substantial equivalence to the predicate device." Implies meeting performance criteria for static reversed insert properties, comparable to the predicate. Specific acceptance criteria and reported performance (e.g., displacement, load-to-failure) are not detailed.
    Wear and range of motion evaluationsNot explicitly stated what standard or specific aspects are tested, but typically assesses the wear rate of bearing surfaces and the range of motion provided by the implant."Non-clinical testing was performed to demonstrate substantial equivalence to the predicate device." Implies that the device exhibited wear and range of motion characteristics comparable to or better than the predicate. Specific acceptance criteria (e.g., wear rate limits, degrees of motion) and reported performance are not detailed.
    Vitamin E material characterization testingNot explicitly stated, but likely involves testing physical and chemical properties of the Vitamin E UHMWPE material used in the reversed inserts."Non-clinical testing was performed to demonstrate substantial equivalence to the predicate device." Implies that the Vitamin E material met specified characteristics (e.g., mechanical properties, stability). Specific acceptance criteria and reported performance (e.g., tensile strength, oxidative stability) are not detailed.
    MRI compatibility evaluationNot explicitly stated what standard, but usually ensures the device is safe for use in an MRI environment (e.g., heating, artifact, force)."Non-clinical testing was performed to demonstrate substantial equivalence to the predicate device." Implies that the device exhibited MRI compatibility comparable to the predicate. Specific acceptance criteria and reported performance (e.g., Mr conditional labeling, temperature rise, artifact size) are not detailed.
    Biocompatibility evaluationISO 10993-1"Non-clinical testing was performed to demonstrate substantial equivalence to the predicate device." Implies that the device materials passed biocompatibility tests (e.g., cytotoxicity, sensitization, irritation) according to ISO 10993-1. Specific acceptance criteria (e.g., pass/fail for each biological effect) and reported performance are not detailed.
    Packaging and shelf life evaluationsISO 11607-1, ISO 11607-2, ASTM F1980"Non-clinical testing was performed to demonstrate substantial equivalence to the predicate device." Implies that the packaging system maintained sterility and integrity over the claimed shelf life according to these standards. Specific acceptance criteria and reported performance (e.g., seal strength, burst strength, microbial ingress) are not detailed.
    Distribution testingISTA Procedure 3A, ASTM D4169, ASTM F2096"Non-clinical testing was performed to demonstrate substantial equivalence to the predicate device." Implies that the packaged product safely withstood typical shipping and handling stresses, maintaining package integrity and device functionality. Specific acceptance criteria (e.g., no damage or breach of sterile barrier after testing) and reported performance are not detailed.
    Sterilization evaluationISO 11137-1, ISO 11137-2"Non-clinical testing was performed to demonstrate substantial equivalence to the predicate device." Implies that the sterilization process successfully rendered the device sterile to the specified sterility assurance level (SAL). Specific acceptance criteria (e.g., SAL of 10^-6) and reported performance (e.g., dosimetric release, bioburden reduction) are not detailed.
    Endotoxin testingAAMI ST72"Non-clinical testing was performed to demonstrate substantial equivalence to the predicate device." Implies that the device met endotoxin limits (e.g.,
    Ask a Question

    Ask a specific question about this device

    Page 1 of 1