Search Results

The VideoGastroscope is used for Esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGI), the internal examination of the upper gastrointestinal tract. The instrument is passed via the mouth, and phariyix through the lumen of the esophagus, stomach, and pylorus to the proximal portion of the duodenum.

Medical Indications Include:

Confirm upper G.I. radiologic findings
Biopsy of known or suspected abnormalities
Identify the source of acute upper G.I. hemorrhage
Monitor the status of chronic disease (e.g., ulcers)
Therapeutic uses (c.g. removal of foreign bodies, stricture, dilatation, etc.)

VG 200 Video Gastroscope

This response is based solely on the provided text, and it appears the provided documents are regulatory letters (FDA 510(k) clearance) rather than a detailed study report. Therefore, much of the requested information about acceptance criteria and study details is not available in the given text.

Here's an attempt to answer based on what's present:

The provided documents are a 510(k) clearance letter and an Indications for Use statement for the "VG 200 Video Gastroscope" (later referred to as "VIDEO GASTROSCOPE MODEL 31750"). These documents describe the device's intended use and FDA's determination of substantial equivalence, but they do not contain a formal study report or explicit acceptance criteria with performance metrics.

Information Not Available in the Provided Text:

• A table of acceptance criteria and the reported device performance: The document is a regulatory clearance, not a study report. It does not list specific performance metrics or acceptance criteria that were quantitatively assessed in a study.
• Sample size used for the test set and the data provenance: No study details are provided.
• Number of experts used to establish the ground truth for the test set and the qualifications of those experts: No study details are provided.
• Adjudication method: No study details are provided.
• 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: This device is a video gastroscope, not an AI-powered diagnostic tool. Therefore, an MRMC study with AI assistance is not relevant to this device's type.
• If a standalone (i.e. algorithm only without human-in-the-loop performance) was done: Not applicable as this is a medical imaging device, not an AI algorithm.
• The type of ground truth used: No study details are provided.
• The sample size for the training set: Not applicable as this is a medical imaging device, not an AI algorithm.
• How the ground truth for the training set was established: Not applicable as this is a medical imaging device, not an AI algorithm.

What can be inferred from the provided text regarding device functionality and regulatory approval:

The device, a "VG 200 Video Gastroscope" (also "VIDEO GASTROSCOPE MODEL 31750"), is cleared for "Esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGI), the internal examination of the upper gastrointestinal tract." Its intended uses, listed under "Medical Indications," imply its expected performance:

• Confirm upper G.I. radiologic findings
• Biopsy of known or suspected abnormalities
• Identify the source of acute upper G.I. hemorrhage
• Monitor the status of chronic disease (e.g., ulcers)
• Therapeutic uses (e.g. removal of foreign bodies, stricture, dilatation, etc.)

Implied Acceptance Criteria (based on 510(k) substantial equivalence):

For a 510(k) clearance, the primary "acceptance criterion" is to demonstrate substantial equivalence to a predicate device already legally marketed. This means the new device must be:

1. Having the same intended use as the predicate device; AND
2. Having the same technological characteristics as the predicate device; OR
3. Having different technological characteristics from the predicate device and the new device:
   • Does not raise different questions of safety and effectiveness; AND
   • Demonstrates that the device is as safe and effective as the predicate device.

The FDA letter confirms that the device "is substantially equivalent...to devices marketed in interstate commerce prior to May 28, 1976." This implies that Welch Allyn, Inc. presented data (likely including comparisons to the predicate device) satisfying the FDA that the video gastroscope met these criteria, but the specific performance benchmarks are not detailed in this regulatory correspondence.

Ask a specific question about this device