Search Results
Found 2 results
510(k) Data Aggregation
(22 days)
TOPAZ Mobile DR System
The TOPAZ Mobile DR System, is a mobile X-ray imaging system, for the purpose of acquiring X-ray images of the desired parts of a patient's anatomy.
This device is not intended for mammography, bone density, fluoroscopy and angiography applications.
The TOPAZ Mobile DR System, (TOPAZ), is a mobile x-ray system and is a modification of the predicate device. There are 2 models for TOPAZ: TOPAZ-32D (32KW) and TOPAZ-40D (40KW). TOPAZ, may be moved quietly and smoothly with a motor drive mechanism.
The core part of x-ray source is a tube assembly, motorized x-ray collimator, HV cable assembly and high frequency x-ray generator. A touch screen LCD based x-ray control console provides a user-friendly interface and technique selection. The Collimator supports high accuracy for selected x-ray field size over any SID. Selection of an anatomical study on the imaging software automatically sets up the x-ray generator's pre-programmed exposure technique.
The X-ray passing through a patient's body is sent to the detector and then converted into electrical signals. These signals go through the process of amplification and digital data conversion in the signal process on the workstation and saved in a DICOM file for review on the device or on a Picture Archiving & Communication System (PACS) workstation.
The provided text is a 510(k) summary for the DRGEM TOPAZ Mobile DR System. It discusses the device, its intended use, and its substantial equivalence to a predicate device. However, it does not contain any information about a study that proves the device meets specific acceptance criteria related to a human-in-the-loop or standalone AI performance study.
The "PERFORMANCE DATA" section explicitly states that "Nonclinical testing results are provided in the 510(k). Validation testing indicated that as required by the risk analysis, designated individuals performed all verification and validation activities and that the results demonstrated that the predetermined acceptance criteria were met." This refers to engineering and safety testing against recognized standards (e.g., IEC 60601-2-54, ANSI AAMI ES60601-1, IEC 62304 for software), not clinical performance studies involving AI or human readers.
The key information missing to answer your request is data from a clinical performance study (e.g., diagnostic accuracy, reader study results). The device described is a mobile X-ray imaging system, which captures images. There is no mention of any integrated AI component that would require an AI-specific performance study with acceptance criteria for diagnostic performance.
Therefore, I cannot populate the table or answer most of your questions as the necessary information is not present in the provided document.
Here's what can be inferred or stated based on the provided text, and what cannot:
1. A table of acceptance criteria and the reported device performance
Cannot populate. The document focuses on regulatory compliance and engineering standards for the X-ray system itself, not diagnostic performance metrics (e.g., sensitivity, specificity, AUC) for an AI component. The "acceptance criteria" mentioned are for non-clinical engineering and safety tests, not clinical performance.
2. Sample sized used for the test set and the data provenance (e.g. country of origin of the data, retrospective or prospective)
Not applicable/Not mentioned for clinical performance. The "test set" referenced in the document pertains to engineering validation and verification tests of the X-ray system's functions, not a clinical data set for evaluating diagnostic performance of an AI.
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 mentioned. Ground truth establishment by experts (e.g., radiologists) is relevant for diagnostic performance studies. This document reports on non-clinical engineering tests.
4. Adjudication method (e.g. 2+1, 3+1, none) for the test set
Not applicable/Not mentioned. Adjudication methods are used in reader studies or for ground truth establishment in clinical performance. This document does not describe such studies.
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. The document does not describe any MRMC study.
6. If a standalone (i.e. algorithm only without human-in-the-loop performance) was done
No. The document does not describe any standalone algorithm performance testing related to diagnostic accuracy.
7. The type of ground truth used (expert concensus, pathology, outcomes data, etc)
Not applicable/Not mentioned for clinical performance. For engineering tests, the "ground truth" would be the successful operation of the device according to its specifications and regulatory standards.
8. The sample size for the training set
Not applicable/Not mentioned. This information would be relevant for an AI device. The document describes an X-ray imaging system, not an AI.
9. How the ground truth for the training set was established
Not applicable/Not mentioned. This information would be relevant for an AI device. The document describes an X-ray imaging system, not an AI.
Summary of the Device and its Testing as per the document:
The TOPAZ Mobile DR System is a mobile X-ray imaging system. The 510(k) submission primarily focuses on demonstrating its substantial equivalence to an existing predicate device (K183292, also a TOPAZ Mobile DR System from DRGEM). The main difference for this new 510(k) (K201124) is the addition of five previously cleared digital X-ray detectors to the TOPAZ system.
The "Performance Data" section details that the system underwent non-clinical testing against various recognized international and national standards (e.g., IEC 60601 series for medical electrical equipment safety, radiation protection, usability; IEC 62304 for medical device software; DICOM standards, JPEG standards, etc.). The acceptance criteria for these tests were met, demonstrating the device's safety and effectiveness as an X-ray imaging system, and its performance as well as the predicate device. This refers to the engineering and regulatory compliance of the hardware and integrated software for image acquisition and handling, not the diagnostic interpretation or AI assistance.
Ask a specific question about this device
(170 days)
Topaz Mobile DR System
The TOPAZ Mobile DR System, is a mobile X-ray imaging system, for the purpose of acquiring X-ray images of the desired parts of a patient's anatomy.
This device is not intended for mammography, bone density, fluoroscopy and angiography applications.
The TOPAZ Mobile DR System. (TOPAZ), is a mobile x-ray system. There are 2 models for TOPAZ: TOPAZ-32D (32KW) and TOPAZ-40D (40KW). TOPAZ, may be moved quietly and smoothly with a motor drive mechanism.
The core part of x-ray source is a tube assembly, motorized x-ray collimator, HV cable assembly and high frequency x-ray generator. A touch screen LCD based x-ray control console provides a user-friendly interface and technique selection. The Collimator supports high accuracy for selected x-ray field size over any SID. Selection of an anatomical study on the imaging software automatically sets up the x-ray generator's pre-programmed exposure technique. Direct radiography via a flat panel detector improves workflow, exam speed and user comfort with efficiency. Digital flat panel detector with Csl screen provides good spatial resolution, MTF, DQE and stability based on a fine pixel pitch. The digital detector type used in TOPAZ is "VARIAN PacScan4336W" or "VARIAN PacScan4336W_V4 which was cleared as part of the Nexus DR™ Digital X-ray Imaging System (with PaxScan 4336Wv4), K161459.
The X-ray passing through a patient's body is sent to the detector and then converted into electrical signals. These signals go through the process of amplification and digital data conversion in the signal process on the workstation and saved in a DICOM file for review on the device or on a Picture Archiving & Communication System (PACS) workstation Image Management features and functions are:
- ROI: Default 13 ROI support .
- MARK: Unlimited support (User preset support) ●
- Horizontal Flip ●
- Vertical Flip .
- Rotate Clockwise (CW) ●
- . Rotate Counter Clockwise (CCW)
- Inverse (Black or White) .
- . Text Annotation
- Caliper / Ruler: Distance tool
- Angle: Angle measurement tool
- Zoom: Image zoom in/out ●
- . Magnify: Image magnify glass window
- . Pan: Image panning
The provided text does not describe acceptance criteria for a device's performance that is proven by a study. Instead, it is a 510(k) summary for the TOPAZ Mobile DR System, which is a mobile X-ray imaging system. The purpose of this document is to demonstrate "substantial equivalence" to a predicate device, meaning it's as safe and effective as a device already on the market.
Therefore, many of the requested points cannot be directly extracted from this document as it focuses on regulatory equivalence rather than specific performance acceptance criteria from a clinical or standalone study.
However, I can extract information related to the non-clinical testing performed to establish safety and effectiveness in comparison to the predicate device.
Here's an analysis based on the provided text, addressing the points where information is available:
1. Table of acceptance criteria and the reported device performance
The document does not provide a table of acceptance criteria for device performance in terms of diagnostic accuracy (e.g., sensitivity, specificity). Instead, it refers to fulfilling predetermined testing criteria based on regulatory standards for X-ray systems.
Acceptance Criteria Type | Acceptance Criteria (from recognized standards) | Reported Device Performance |
---|---|---|
Electrical Safety | Compliance with IEC 60601-1, -2-54, -1-3, -2-28, -1-2 | "TOPAZ Mobile DR System has met all the requirements listed in the Standards" (except for inapplicable requirements). "Passed all predetermined testing criteria." |
Software Life Cycle | Compliance with ANSI AAMI IEC 62304 | Met requirements. |
Usability | Compliance with IEC 60601-1-6 | Met requirements. |
Radiation Protection | Compliance with IEC 60601-1-3, IEC 62494-1 | Met requirements. |
Electromagnetic Compatibility | Compliance with IEC 60601-1-2 | Met requirements. |
Digital Imaging & Communications | Compliance with NEMA PS 3.1 - 3.20 (DICOM) | Met requirements. |
Image Compression | Compliance with JPEG Standard IEC/ISO10918-1 | Met requirements. |
Risk Management | Compliance with ANSI AAMI ISO 14971 | Met requirements. |
Labeling Symbols | Compliance with ISO 15223-1 | Met requirements. |
General System Functionality | "Validation Test Plan was designed to evaluate all input functions, and actions performed by TOPAZ" | "Validation testing indicated that... results demonstrated that the predetermined acceptance criteria were met." |
2. Sample sized used for the test set and the data provenance (e.g. country of origin of the data, retrospective or prospective)
- Sample Size: Not applicable in the context of diagnostic performance. The testing mentioned is non-clinical, focusing on compliance with safety and performance standards of the physical device and its software.
- Data Provenance: Not applicable. The testing was conducted at the factory and by "Standards testing facilities."
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 as this document details non-clinical testing for substantial equivalence, not a study evaluating diagnostic performance against a ground truth.
4. Adjudication method (e.g. 2+1, 3+1, none) for the test set
- Not applicable. The "test set" here refers to the system itself being tested against regulatory standards, not image data being adjudicated.
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. A MRMC comparative effectiveness study was explicitly NOT done. The document states: "Clinical testing is not necessary for the TOPAZ Mobile DR system in order to demonstrate substantial equivalence to the predicate device." This device is a basic X-ray system, not an AI-powered diagnostic tool.
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 an algorithm, and its performance is evaluated in the context of its function to acquire images, not analyze them.
7. The type of ground truth used (expert concensus, pathology, outcomes data, etc)
- Not applicable. For the non-clinical testing, the "ground truth" was the specifications and requirements outlined by the various recognized international and national standards (e.g., IEC, ANSI AAMI, NEMA, ISO).
8. The sample size for the training set
- Not applicable. There is no mention of a "training set" as this is not an AI/algorithmic device.
9. How the ground truth for the training set was established
- Not applicable.
Ask a specific question about this device
Page 1 of 1