Search Results
Found 1 results
510(k) Data Aggregation
(149 days)
Pitkar External Fixation System - Rail Mechanism
Pitkar External Fixation System- Rail Mechanism consist of Rail Fixation System and ALFA Fixator System. Their components are intended to be used on adult or pediatric patients as required.
A. Rail fixation System
1.Fracture fixation
2.For correcting diaphyseal deformities. metaphyseal deformities with or without shortenings
3.Correction of bony or soft tissue deformities
4.Limb Lengthening
5.For treating non-union and mal-union
6.Bone transport application
B. ALFA Fixator System
1.Open and closed fracture fixation
2. Fractures and disease which generally may result in joint contractures or loss of range of motion and fractures requiring distraction:
3.Pseudoarthrosis of long bones;
4.Limb lengthening;
5.Infected fractures or non-unions; and
6.Correction of long bone deformities.
Note: For Rail Fixation System and ALFA Fixator System
- For Adult Assembly: Population to be adult males and females for given indications
- For Pediatric Assembly: Population to be between age of 5 to 10 for given indications
- It is recommended to avoid operating on children under the age of five, in case of pediatric application
Pitkar External Fixation System- Rail Mechanism. The subject application has two devices covered that fall under Rail fixation category. Both the systems have Adult & Pediatric apparatus. Both the systems have different Rail design & clamps design. They are designated as: 1. Rail Fixation System 2. Alfa Fixator System Thus, there will be two subject devices for approval under this heading as both these systems have same application, device description, Indications, material composition etc.
This document describes the 510(k) premarket notification for the "Pitkar External Fixation System - Rail Mechanism." This device is intended for orthopedic procedures such as fracture fixation, deformity correction, and limb lengthening.
1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance
| Acceptance Criteria (Test Type) | Device Performance (Reported Results) |
|---|---|
| Axial Load Test (ASTM F1541-02) | Demonstrated against applicable standard ASTM F1541-02 |
| Torsion Test (ASTM F1541-02) | Demonstrated against applicable standard ASTM F1541-02 |
| Fatigue Test (ASTM F1541-02) | Demonstrated against applicable standard ASTM F1541-02 |
| Cantilever Bending Test (ASTM F1541-02) | Demonstrated against applicable standard ASTM F1541-02 |
| 4-Point Bending Test (ASTM F1541-02) | Demonstrated against applicable standard ASTM F1541-02 |
| Biocompatibility (ISO 10993-1) | Meets ISO 10993-1 standard requirements; no further testing required. |
2. Sample Size Used for the Test Set and Data Provenance
The document does not explicitly state the specific sample sizes used for each non-clinical test. It mentions that the device performance was "demonstrated against applicable standards ASTM F1541-02" for mechanical tests and "meets the ISO 10993-1 standard requirements" for biocompatibility.
The data provenance is retrospective, as the justification for biocompatibility relies on the device being comprised of "the same material and have the same manufacturing, body contact, and sterilization properties as other commercially available devices and materials with a long history of clinical use in orthopedic implants." The mechanical tests are also non-clinical and performed under controlled laboratory conditions rather than on patient data.
3. Number of Experts Used to Establish the Ground Truth for the Test Set and Their Qualifications
This information is not applicable as the described tests are non-clinical engineering and materials tests, not studies involving expert medical interpretation or diagnosis.
4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set
This information is not applicable as the described tests are non-clinical engineering and materials tests, not studies requiring adjudication of various expert opinions.
5. Multi-Reader Multi-Case (MRMC) Comparative Effectiveness Study
A multi-reader multi-case (MRMC) comparative effectiveness study was not done. This submission is for a physical medical device (external fixation system), and the performance evaluation is based on non-clinical mechanical and biocompatibility testing, not on human interpretation of images or data.
6. Standalone (Algorithm Only) Performance Study
A standalone performance study was not done. This submission is for a physical medical device, not an algorithm or AI software. All tests conducted were on the physical components of the device.
7. Type of Ground Truth Used
The ground truth used for the performance evaluation consists of established engineering standards and material science principles.
- For mechanical tests (Axial Load, Torsion, Fatigue, Cantilever Bending, 4-Point Bending), the ground truth is adherence to the specifications and performance requirements outlined in ASTM F1541-02.
- For biocompatibility, the ground truth is compliance with the requirements of ISO 10993-1 and the demonstrated safe use of similar materials in predicate devices.
8. Sample Size for the Training Set
This information is not applicable as this is a physical medical device, not an AI/ML algorithm that requires a training set. The device's performance is not learned from data but inherent in its design, materials, and manufacturing.
9. How the Ground Truth for the Training Set Was Established
This information is not applicable for the reasons stated in point 8.
Ask a specific question about this device
Page 1 of 1