Search Filters

Search Results

Found 1 results

510(k) Data Aggregation

    K Number
    K072758
    Manufacturer
    Date Cleared
    2007-12-18

    (81 days)

    Product Code
    Regulation Number
    882.5320
    Reference & Predicate Devices
    N/A
    Why did this record match?
    Device Name :

    SYNTHES (USA) 2.0MM TITANIUM T-PLATE

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

    The Synthes (USA) 2.0mm Titanium T-Plate is intended for use in the reconstruction of the cranium (skull) following surgical decompression procedures of the posterior fossa or transcervical skull based approach, with or without duraplasty, including procedures to treat Chiari Type I Malformation. The plate design is also intended for use in non-load bearing fixation, including cranial bone fixation. The device is intended for single use only.

    Device Description

    The Synthes (USA) 2.0mm Titanium T-Plate is a T-shaped plate configuration to be used with the Synthes 2.0mm screws. The plates are manufactured in titanium and are intended for single use only.

    AI/ML Overview

    This document is a 510(k) summary for the Synthes (USA) 2.0mm Titanium T-Plate. It does not contain acceptance criteria or a study proving the device meets acceptance criteria in the manner you've described.

    The 510(k) process is primarily a demonstration of "substantial equivalence" to a legally marketed predicate device, not necessarily a clinical performance study with acceptance criteria. For devices like this cranioplasty plate, substantial equivalence is typically established through:

    • Material properties: Demonstrating the new device uses similar materials with comparable strength, biocompatibility, etc., to the predicate.
    • Design and dimensions: Showing similar configurations, sizes, and screw compatibility.
    • Intended use: Confirming the new device targets the same clinical applications.

    Therefore, I cannot provide the requested information as it is not present in the provided text. The document focuses on administrative details, device description, and intended use, concluding with a substantial equivalence determination based on comparison to predicate devices, not a performance study with quantitative acceptance criteria.

    If this were a software device or a diagnostic device, the requested information would be expected in a 510(k) submission. However, for a Class II implantable device like a cranioplasty plate, the focus is on materials, mechanical properties, and biocompatibility, often demonstrated through bench testing rather than clinical trials with human readers or ground truth adjudication.

    Ask a Question

    Ask a specific question about this device

    Page 1 of 1