Search Results

The Single Axle Total Elbow is indicated for use in rheumatoid arthritis, non-inflammatory degenerative joint disease including osteoarthritis and avascular necrosis, correction of severe functional deformity, revision procedures where other treatments or devices have failed, and treatment of acute or chronic fractures with humeral epicondyle involvement which are unmanageable using other treatment methods. This linked constrained elbow prosthesis is indicated for joints with both intact and limited soft tissue structures about the elbow.

This device is a single use implant. It is intended for use with bone cement.

The Single Axle Total Elbow Prosthesis is a constrained, "sloppyhinge" elbow device used to replace the humeral-ulnar articulation of the human elbow. The implant consists of two main components, an ulnar component and a humeral component, which are joined by an axle (refer to Exhibit III). The Single Axle Elbow features a "sloppy-hinge" that will allow for 16 degrees of varus/valgus movement (refer to Exhibit III). A hyperextension stop (flat) is placed on the ulnar component to control the amount of hyperextension allowed by the device. The device shown in Exhibit III was designed to have 0 degrees of hyperextension, but some hyperextension may be allowed at the specific request of the surgeon. The amount of flexion of the device is approximately 137° (see Exhibit III), but this may also change somewhat due to specific patients' anatomy and surgeon requests.

The humeral component will be made of titanium alloy. Each humeral component will be custom designed for patient specific anatomy from X-rays, CT-scans, or some other media for measuring patient anatomy. In some cases the humeral component may include a replacement portion if distal humeral bone loss exists (refer to Exhibit IV). A portion of the extramedullary and intramedullary sections of the humeral component may be plasma sprayed with the remainder of the intramedullary portion having a bead blast finish. Please refer to Exhibit IV for the locations of the various surfaces and range of dimensions.

The ulnar component will be made of titanium alloy. The ulnar and humeral components will be separated by a polyethylene Saddle Bearing to prevent metal on metal contact (refer to Exhibit III). Each ulnar component will be designed for patient specific anatomy from X-rays, CT-scans, or some other media for measuring patient anatomy. In some cases the ulnar component may include a replacement portion if proximal ulnar bone loss exists (refer to Exhibit IV). The ulnar component may also contain through slots posteriorly for the attachment of soft tissues. A portion of the extramedullary and intramedullary sections of the ulnar component may be plasma sprayed to 0.030/0.040" thick or a thinner coating (Bondcoat), with the remainder of the intramedullary portion having a bead-blast finish. Please refer to Exhibit IV for the locations of the various surfaces and range of dimensions

The humeral and ulnar components are connected by an axle bearing, metal reinforcing rod or axle and a saddle bearing. The metal reinforcing rod or axle is cobalt chromium. The axle is sleeved by an axle bearing, which is manufactured from ultra high molecular weight polyethylene (UHMWPE). The axle retaining clips are manufactured from titanium alloy. The saddle bearing is also manufactured from UHMWPE. The saddle bearing. axle bearing, and retaining clips will be consistent for all Biomet Single Hinge Elbows.

The provided text describes a medical device, the "Single Axle Total Elbow," and its FDA 510(k) clearance (K983036). However, the document is a regulatory approval letter and a summary of safety and effectiveness, not a study report detailing acceptance criteria and performance data in the way typically found for AI/ML medical devices.

Therefore, I cannot extract the requested information regarding acceptance criteria and a study proving device performance as it would be presented for an AI/ML device. The document pertains to a traditional orthopedic implant, and the approval process for such devices relies on different types of evidence, primarily substantial equivalence to predicate devices, material safety, and mechanical testing, rather than clinical performance metrics like sensitivity, specificity, or reader improvement in an MRMC study.

Here's why each point cannot be fulfilled based on the provided text:

1. A table of acceptance criteria and the reported device performance: This document does not contain performance metrics or acceptance criteria as would be defined for an AI/ML device (e.g., specific accuracy thresholds). The "performance" described relates to design features (e.g., 16 degrees of varus/valgus movement, 137° flexion) and material composition, not clinical outcomes from a diagnostic or prognostic study.
2. Sample size used for the test set and the data provenance: Not applicable. There is no "test set" in the context of an AI/ML clinical study. For this implant, evidence typically comes from bench testing, biomechanical studies, and clinical data from predicate devices, which are not detailed here in that format.
3. Number of experts used to establish the ground truth for the test set and the qualifications of those experts: Not applicable. Ground truth, as defined for AI/ML algorithms, would not be established by experts for the design features of an orthopedic implant.
4. Adjudication method for the test set: Not applicable.
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 not an AI/ML device.
6. If a standalone (i.e. algorithm only without human-in-the-loop performance) was done: Not applicable. This is not an AI/ML device.
7. The type of ground truth used: For a device like this, "ground truth" would relate to its structural integrity, material properties, and biomechanical function as tested in a lab, or successful clinical outcomes from predicate devices. Not applicable in the AI/ML sense.
8. The sample size for the training set: Not applicable. This is not an AI/ML device that requires a training set.
9. How the ground truth for the training set was established: Not applicable.

In summary, the provided text describes the regulatory clearance of a traditional medical implant, not an AI/ML device. The requested information format is specific to AI/ML device evaluation, which is not present in this document.

Ask a specific question about this device