Search Filters

Search Results

Found 1 results

510(k) Data Aggregation

    K Number
    K083566
    Date Cleared
    2009-03-03

    (90 days)

    Product Code
    Regulation Number
    888.3310
    Reference & Predicate Devices
    Why did this record match?
    Device Name :

    R3 CONSTRAINED LINER, CONSTRAINED LINER

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

    The R3 Constrained Liner Acetabular System is a cemented or uncemented prosthesis intended to replace a hip joint. The Constrained Liner is intended for primary or revision patients at high risk for hip dislocation due to a history of prior dislocation, bone loss, soft tissue laxity, neuromuscular disease, or intra-operative instability and for whom all other options to constrained acefabular components have been considered. The R3 Constrained Liner is intended for single use only.

    Device Description

    The R3 Constrained Liner and Shell Construct is a multi-piece acetabular component made up of an R3 Shell and the Constrained Liner Constrained Liner Construct includes a bipolar bearing which articulates with a captured outer polyethylene liner, locking ring and outer poly support ring.

    The R3 Constrained Liner may be used with previously implanted femoral stems, femoral heads and acetabular shells as in a revision case, or it may be used in primary cases and implanted along with a shell, head and stem. The R3 Constrained liner was designed to be used with existing Smith & Nephew hip components. The R3 Constrained Liner should not be used with ceramic femoral heads or skirted femoral heads of any material.

    AI/ML Overview

    The provided document is a 510(k) summary for the Smith & Nephew R3 Constrained Liners. This document details the regulatory clearance process for a medical device and relies on showing "substantial equivalence" to a predicate device, rather than explicit acceptance criteria and performance studies for the new device.

    Therefore, the document does not contain the requested information regarding specific acceptance criteria, a study proving the device meets those criteria, sample sizes, data provenance, expert ground truth establishment, adjudication methods, MRMC studies, standalone performance, or training set details.

    Instead, the document states:

    • D. Summary of Technological comparison: "The intended use, design, and materials of the R3 Constrained Liners are substantially equivalent to the previously cleared Osteonics Constrained Liners (P960047). Design Control Activities have been completed and the results indicated that the subject device is safe and effective."

    This indicates that the safety and effectiveness of the R3 Constrained Liners were established through design control activities and a comparison to a predicate device, rather than through a performance study against predefined acceptance criteria for the new device as would be typical for software or AI medical devices.

    To answer your request, if this were a software/AI device, I would need a different type of submission document that would detail performance studies.

    Ask a Question

    Ask a specific question about this device

    Page 1 of 1