Search Results

Intended for use by a qualified/trained doctor or technician on both adult and pediatric subjects for taking diagnostic radiographic exposures of the skull, spinal column, extremities, and other body parts. Applications can be performed with the patient sitting, standing, or lying in the prone or supine position. Not for mammography

The Soltus 500 Mobile Digital X-Ray System, Model 10501, ("Mobile X-Ray System") is the same as the predicate mobile PhoeniX with 2 additional features, (i) Distributed Antenna System (DAS), and (ii) Enhanced Work Flow (EWF). The Mobile X-Ray System has motorized movement and full battery operation. It contains a touch screen that operates as a control console. The Mobile X-Ray System supports various Canon flat panel detectors (Digital Radiography CXDI) supplied with the unit.

The provided text is a 510(k) Summary for the Soltus 500 mobile X-ray system. This document focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence to a predicate device rather than presenting a study to prove meeting specific acceptance criteria for performance metrics typically associated with AI/CADe devices.

Therefore, many of the requested elements for acceptance criteria and study details (like sample size for test/training sets, expert qualifications, adjudication methods, effect size of human readers with AI, ground truth details) are not applicable or findable in this type of submission.

Here's a breakdown based on the information available in the provided text:

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

The document doesn't present specific performance metrics or acceptance criteria in the typical sense of an AI/CADe device. Instead, the "acceptance criteria" are implied by demonstrating substantial equivalence to a predicate device and compliance with relevant safety and performance 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/Not provided. This device is a mobile X-ray system, not an AI/CADe device that performs diagnostic analysis on images. The evaluation primarily involved bench testing of the hardware and software components, and comparison to the predicate device. Clinical testing was explicitly stated as "not required."

3. Number of experts used to establish the ground truth for the test set and the qualifications of those experts (e.g. radiologist with 10 years of experience)

• Not applicable/Not provided. No clinical ground truth was established as clinical testing was not required.

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

• Not applicable/Not provided. No adjudication method was used as no clinical test set requiring ground truth was established.

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

• No. This was not an AI/CADe device, and therefore no MRMC study was performed.

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

• Not applicable. This device is an X-ray imaging system, not a diagnostic algorithm.

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

• Not applicable/Not provided. No clinical ground truth was used for evaluation. The "ground truth" for the device's functionality was based on engineering specifications, performance standards, and comparison to the predicate device's established performance, verified through bench testing.

8. The sample size for the training set

• Not applicable/Not provided. This is a hardware system, not an AI/ML algorithm that requires a training set.

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

• Not applicable/Not provided. This is a hardware system; there is no training set or ground truth in this context.

Ask a specific question about this device