Search Results

The VS3-Iridium System is intended to provide real-time visible and near infrared fluorescence imaging in both open and minimally invasive procedures.

Upon intravenous administration and use of an ICG consistent with its approved labeling, the VS3-Iridium System is used to perform fluorescence imaging visualization of vessels, blood flow and tissue perfusion before during and after general minimally invasive surgical procedures and plastic, micro-, reconstructive surgeries.

Upon interstitial administration and use of ICG consistent with its approved labeling, the Endoscope configuration of the VS3-Iridium System is used to perform intraoperative fluorescence imaging and visualization of the lymphatic system, including lymphatic vessels and lymph nodes.

Upon administration and use of pafolacianine consistent with its approved labeling, the VS3-Iridium 785 nm System is used to perform intraoperative fluorescence imaging of tissues that have taken up the drug.

The VS3-Iridium System is an advanced stereoscopic visualization system made up of a combination of hardware and software to provide high definition visible and near infrared (IR) fluorescent imaging. The visualization system can incorporate an endoscope for minimally invasive surgical procedures and a microscope positioned above the patient during open surgical procedures.

The VS3-Iridium System including the endoscope and the microscope is designed to work with an approved infrared dye (Indocyanine green (ICG) or pafolacianine sodium injection or pafolacianine). ICG may be excited at excitation at either 785 or 805 nm, and pafolacianine is excited only by the 785 nm wavelength. The principle of operation is the same for both infrared dyes. That is, the VS3-Iridium System provides excitation light to the surgical field to excite the dye molecules and captures emission from the dye using an IR camera, enabling qualitative and quantitative measurement of the IR intensity. Near IR fluorescence imaging with ICG permits the system to visualize blood flow and related tissue circulation, of lymphatic flow.

The VS3-Iridium System allows the capture of normal (white) light image in parallel with the fluorescence IR image and displays both to the surgeon to provide a view of the anatomy. In addition, the VS3-Iridium System permits recording surgical procedures, storing them on removable storage devices, and replaying the procedures.

This document describes a 510(k) premarket notification for the VS3-Iridium System (VS3-IR), an advanced stereoscopic visualization system. The filing seeks to re-frame the indications for use statement to align with the specific indications of legally marketed Indocyanine green (ICG) products and pafolacianine, and to eliminate the need for the VS3-Iridium Fluorescence ICG Kit.

Here's an analysis of the provided information about acceptance criteria and supporting studies:

1. Table of acceptance criteria and reported device performance:

   The document explicitly states: "No performance data are needed to support the modified indications for use. As noted above, there are no technological changes associated with the proposed labeling changes. Additionally, no new surgical procedures or tissue types are being referenced in the modified indications for use."

   Therefore, there is no table of acceptance criteria or reported device performance for this specific 510(k) submission, as the changes are purely administrative regarding the Indications for Use statement and the removal of an accessory, not a modification to the device's technological characteristics or its core performance. The FDA granted substantial equivalence based on the device being "the same or similar" to previously cleared versions.

2. Sample size used for the test set and the data provenance: Not applicable. No new performance data was required for this 510(k) submission as there were no technological changes to the device.

3. Number of experts used to establish the ground truth for the test set and the qualifications of those experts: Not applicable. No new performance data was required for this 510(k) submission.

4. Adjudication method for the test set: Not applicable. No new performance data was required for this 510(k) submission.

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. The VS3-Iridium System is described as a visualization system for real-time visible and near infrared fluorescence imaging, not an AI-assisted diagnostic or interpretative tool that would involve human readers improving with AI assistance. This submission specifically deals with changes to the Indications for Use, not a new AI component or performance evaluation.

6. If a standalone (i.e., algorithm only without human-in-the-loop performance) was done: Not applicable. The VS3-Iridium System is a visualization system used by a surgeon, implying human-in-the-loop operation. This submission does not introduce or evaluate any new standalone algorithmic performance.

7. The type of ground truth used (expert consensus, pathology, outcomes data, etc.): Not applicable. No new performance data was required for this 510(k) submission.

8. The sample size for the training set: Not applicable. This submission concerns re-framing indications for use and removing an accessory, not a new algorithm development or training.

9. How the ground truth for the training set was established: Not applicable. As above, this submission concerns re-framing indications for use and removing an accessory, not a new algorithm development or training.

Summary of the Study and Rationale for No New Performance Data:

The core of this 510(k) submission (K223020) is a "special 510(k) premarket notification to re-frame the indications for use statement to be consistent with specific indications of legally marketed ICG products, eliminating the need for the VS3-Iridium Fluorescence ICG Kit."

The manufacturer, Visionsense, Ltd., argues that:

• There are no changes in the technological characteristics of the visualization system hardware, software, or accessories.
• The only change in the system configuration is to obsolete the VS3-IR ICG Kit.
• The proposed changes in the indications for use statement are to reflect the previous discontinuation of a 3D module and associated endoscopes, streamline ICG-related indications, and reflect that these indications are derived from approved ICG drug labeling.
• These changes are considered a "simple statement of product functionality that has always been present and does not represent any new use for the system."
• There are "no questions related to safety or effectiveness of the device when used as labeled," and the change is "not considered a critical change to the intended therapeutic, diagnostic, prosthetic, or surgical use of the device."

Based on these justifications, the FDA determined that "No performance data are needed to support the modified indications for use." The device was deemed substantially equivalent to its own previously cleared versions (K150018, K152204, K183453, K191851, K210265) because the modifications were administrative and did not alter the technological characteristics or intended use in a way that would raise new questions of safety or effectiveness.

Ask a specific question about this device

The VS3 Iridium System is intended for viewing anatomical structures during invasive surgery and for viewing fluorescent images for the visual assessment of blood flow and lymphatic flow. The unit is indicated for viewing internal surgical sites during general surgical procedures. It provides an adjunctive method for the evaluation of tissue perfusion and related tissue transfer circulation in tissue and free flaps used in general, plastic, micro-and reconstructive surgical procedures. It also enables the identification of functional lymphatic vessel, and/or lymph nodes. The VS3 Iridium System is also intended to visualize tissues that have taken up the pafolacianine during procedures that are consistent with the approved labeling of that dye.

Upon intravenous administration and use of an ICG consistent with its approved labeling, the Iridium Module of the VS3-IR System is used to perform intraoperative fluorescence angiography.

Upon interstitial administration and use of ICG consistent with its approved labeling, the Endoscope configuration of the VS3-IR System is used to perform intraoperative fluorescence imaging and visualization of the lymphatic system, including lymphatic vessels and lymph nodes.

Upon administration and use of pafolacianine in accordance with its approved labeling, the VS3-IR 785 nm System is used to perform intraoperative fluorescence imaging of tissues that have taken up the drug.

The VS3 Iridium System is an advanced stereoscopic visualization system made up of a combination of hardware and software to provide high definition visible and near infrared (IR) fluorescent imaging. The visualization system can incorporate an endoscope for minimally invasive surgical procedures and a microscope positioned above the patient during open surgical procedures.

The VS3 Iridium System including the endoscope and the microscope is designed to work with an approved infrared dye (Indocyanine green (ICG) or pafolacianine sodium injection or pafolacianine). ICG may be excited at excitation at either 785 or 805 nm, and pafolacianine is excited only by the 785 nm wavelength. The principle of operation is the same for both infrared dyes. That is, the VS3 Iridium System provides excitation light to the surgical field to excite the dye molecules and captures emission from the dye using an IR camera, enabling qualitative and quantitative measurement of the IR intensity. Near IR fluorescence imaging with ICG permits the system to visualize blood flow and related tissue circulation, of lymphatic flow.

The VS3 Iridium System allows the capture of normal (white) light image in parallel with the fluorescence IR image and displays both to the surgeon to provide a view of the anatomy. In addition, the VS3 Iridium System permits recording surgical procedures, storing them on removable storage devices, and replaying the procedures.

This Traditional 510(k) premarket notification is to expand the indication for use statement to include the additional cleared infrared dye, pafolacianine sodium injection, for use with infrared imaging.

Here's an analysis of the acceptance criteria and the study that proves the device meets them, based on the provided text:

Acceptance Criteria and Device Performance

The provided text focuses on expanding the indications for use of the VS3 Iridium System to include pafolacianine. The acceptance criteria are implicitly tied to demonstrating the safety and efficacy of the device when used with this new fluorescent dye, specifically its ability to detect target lesions.

Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance:

The study aimed to demonstrate the benefit of using the VS3 Iridium System with pafolacianine (OTL38) for detecting folate receptor positive (FR+) ovarian cancer that would otherwise be missed.

Study Details:

1. Sample size used for the test set and the data provenance:

   • Sample Size: The imaging subgroup (those using the VS3 Iridium System) had a sample size of n=127.
   • Data Provenance: The study was a "phase 3, randomized, single dose, open-label study." While the specific country of origin is not explicitly stated for the data, the clinicaltrials.gov identifier (NCT03180307) indicates it was a registered clinical trial, which typically involves prospective data collection.

2. Number of experts used to establish the ground truth for the test set and the qualifications of those experts:

   • This information is not provided in the text. The text mentions "confirmed FR+ ovarian cancer evaluable lesion," but it doesn't detail how this confirmation (ground truth) was established or who established it.

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

   • This information is not provided in the text.

4. 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 was not a MRMC comparative effectiveness study in the typical sense of evaluating human readers with and without AI assistance for interpretation.
   • It was a study evaluating a device (VS3 Iridium System) used with a fluorescent dye (pafolacianine) to detect lesions not visible with normal light or palpation. The "effect size" is the proportion of patients where these additional lesions were found (33%).

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

   • No, this was not a standalone (algorithm only) study. The device is a "visualization system" used by surgeons/clinicians for intraoperative imaging. The detection of lesions relies on the combination of the OTL38 (pafolacianine) and NIR fluorescent light observed by humans.

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

   • The text frequently mentions "confirmed FR+ ovarian cancer evaluable lesion." This strongly implies that the ground truth for the presence of these lesions was based on pathology or other definitive clinical confirmation methods (e.g., biopsy). However, the exact method and who confirmed it are not detailed.

7. The sample size for the training set:

   • The provided text describes a Phase 3 clinical study designed to test the performance of the device, not to train it. The VS3 Iridium System is primarily an imaging and visualization system, not an AI-driven diagnostic algorithm that would typically require a separate "training set" in the context of machine learning. Therefore, information about a training set is not applicable/provided for this type of device and study.

8. How the ground truth for the training set was established:

   • As mentioned above, information about a training set is not applicable/provided for this device and study.

Ask a specific question about this device

Upon intravenous administration and use of an ICG consistent with its approved label, the Iridium Module of the VS3-IR System is used to perform intraoperative fluorescence angiography.

Upon interstitial administration and use of ICG consistent with its approved label, the Endoscope configuration of the VS3-IR System is used to perform intraoperative fluorescence imaging and visualization of the lymphatic system, including lymphatic vessels and lymph nodes.

Clearance was originally given for the Visionsense Stereoscopic Vision System (VSII) in K073279, K081102, K082667, and K082355. Clearance was given for a 3D High Definition version of the VSII System called the VS3 Stereoscopic High Definition Vision System (VS3) in K123467, K131434, K141002. Clearance included the HD3D Camera, Laser Light Source (LLS), VS3 3D Endoscope, Camera Control Unit (CCU), Display Monitor, Xenon Light Source, and Endoscopic Light Cable.

Clearance was given for an iridium version of the VS3 system called the "VS3-IR System" in K150018 and K152204. This system introduced an iridium miniature microscope in K150018 and an iridium endoscope in K152204. The cleared system added a Light Integrator and an ICG Kit. The VS3-IR utilizes the VS3 system with a special Miniature Microscope (MMS) that is positioned 20cm to 45cm above the patient during the surgical procedure. The VS3-IR can also be used with an Iridium Endoscope to perform minimally invasive procedures. The VS3-IR is designed to work with Indocyanine Green (ICG) which is an IR fluorescence imaging agent and is supplied in the "VS3-IR Fluorescence ICG Kit". Each cleared "VS3-IR Fluorescence ICG Kit" contains six 25mg vials of sterile ICG imaging agent and six 10ml vials of sterile Water for Injection. ICG is a sterile, water soluble, tricarbocyanine dye with a peak spectral absorption at 785nm or 805nm in blood plasma or blood. ICG contains not more than 5.0% sodium iodide. ICG is to be administered intravenously. The sterile Water for Injection provided with the ICG, pH of 5.0 to 7.0, is used to dissolve the ICG. Before injection of ICG for each patient's imaging procedure, the ICG must be reconstituted using the sterile Water for Injection. ICG in blood has excitation at 785nm or 805nm. The VS3-IR system provides excitation light to the surgical field to excite the dye molecules, captures emission from the dye using an IR camera and measures the fluorescence signal intensity. The system enables high definition imaging for both fluorescence and visible light imaging, with real-time overlay of fluorescence and visible light images for display on the monitor. The system permits recording surgical procedures, storing them on removable storage devices, and playing the procedures back.

Clearance was given for adding three working channels to the VS3 in K153548 and the accessory "Trans-Anal Introducer" was cleared in K171208.

The VS3-IR system (805nm) was cleared for adding the excitation wavelength of 785nm in K183453.

The provided text describes a 510(k) premarket notification for the Medtronic VS3-IR device, seeking clearance to expand its indications for use. It details the device, its predicate, and performance data from various tests, but it does not contain a study explicitly proving the device meets specific acceptance criteria related to its clinical performance (e.g., sensitivity, specificity, accuracy) for fluorescence imaging and visualization of the lymphatic system.

The "Performance Data" section primarily focuses on:

• Biocompatibility: Confirmation that patient-contacting materials are the same as previously cleared devices and are biocompatible.
• Electrical Safety and EMC: Compliance with relevant IEC standards.
• Software Verification and Validation: Adherence to FDA guidance for "minor" level of concern software.
• Cybersecurity: Description of security features for a locked-down, stand-alone device.

The document discusses expanding the indications for use based on its substantial equivalence to a predicate device (PINPOINT Endoscopic Fluorescence Imaging System, K182606), particularly for visualizing the lymphatic system with interstitial administration of ICG. The substantial equivalence argument relies on technological characteristics being similar or having appropriate mitigations, rather than a direct clinical performance study with acceptance criteria for this expanded indication.

Therefore, I cannot fulfill all parts of your request because the provided document does not describe a study with clinical performance acceptance criteria, sample sizes for test sets, expert ground truth, adjudication methods, or MRMC studies for the expanded indication.

However, I can extract information related to the device's technical characteristics and the types of performance data that were submitted.

Here's an analysis based on the available information:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance:

As noted, the document does not present acceptance criteria for clinical performance (e.g., sensitivity, specificity, or accuracy for visualizing the lymphatic system) for the VS3-IR for its expanded indication, nor does it present device performance against such criteria. The reported "performance data" are related to safety, engineering, and software aspects.

2. Sample Size Used for the Test Set and Data Provenance:

No information is provided in this document regarding a test set sample size or clinical data provenance (e.g., country of origin, retrospective/prospective) for the expanded indication of lymphatic system visualization. The "Performance Data" section describes engineering and software tests, not clinical performance studies for this specific intended use.

3. Number of Experts Used to Establish Ground Truth and Qualifications:

Not applicable, as no clinical performance study with expert ground truth establishment for a test set is described in the provided text.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set:

Not applicable, as no clinical performance study with adjudication is described.

5. Multi-Reader Multi-Case (MRMC) Comparative Effectiveness Study:

No MRMC study is mentioned or its results (effect size of human reader improvement with AI vs. without AI assistance) reported in the document.

6. Standalone (Algorithm Only Without Human-in-the-Loop Performance) Study:

The document describes the VS3-IR system as an imaging device. While it performs "intraoperative fluorescence imaging and visualization," it is a tool for a surgeon, not an AI algorithm performing a diagnostic task autonomously. Therefore, a standalone algorithm performance study, in the typical sense of AI, is not applicable or described.

7. Type of Ground Truth Used:

For the expanded indication, the document relies on substantial equivalence to the predicate device (PINPOINT) which also has an indication for "intraoperative fluorescence imaging and visualization of the lymphatic system, including lymphatic vessels and lymph nodes" using interstitial ICG. The basis for the predicate's clearance for this indication would have involved demonstrating its performance, but that information is not detailed here. No independent clinical ground truth (e.g., pathology, outcomes data, or expert consensus) is discussed for the VS3-IR in this document for this expanded indication.

8. Sample Size for the Training Set:

Not applicable. The document does not describe the development of an AI algorithm with a training set. The device is a fluorescence imaging system.

9. How the Ground Truth for the Training Set Was Established:

Not applicable, as no AI algorithm with a training set is described.

Summary of what the document does convey for the expanded indication:

The clearance for the expanded indication ("Upon interstitial administration and use of ICG consistent with its approved label, the Endoscope configuration of the VS3-IR System is used to perform intraoperative fluorescence imaging and visualization of the lymphatic system, including lymphatic vessels and lymph nodes") is based on demonstrating substantial equivalence to a predicate device (PINPOINT Endoscopic Fluorescence Imaging System, K182606) which has a similar indication. This substantial equivalence is primarily supported by the similarity in intended use, technological characteristics (e.g., imaging agent, imaging head, light source type, spectral bandwidth, imaging distance ranges for endoscope configuration, scope dimensions, emission band, emission capture, and visible/IR image display), and comprehensive non-clinical performance data (biocompatibility, electrical safety, EMC, software, cybersecurity) proving the device itself is safe and effective for its stated functions. The document does not present a de novo clinical study with specific acceptance criteria for the VS3-IR's performance in visualizing the lymphatic system.

Ask a specific question about this device

The Early Vue VS30 is intended to measure, display, alarm and, record physiological information of adult, pediatric and neonatal patients in hospitals and in out-of-hospital patient care is administered by a healthcare professional (such as clinics, outpatient surgery facilities, long-term care facilities, and physician offices). It is not intended for use in mobile settings such as ambulances and aircraft. Clinical users may use the monitor during patient transport within a healthcare facility.

The intended use of measurement parameters for each patient type is shown in table below (Parameter (patient types)): Non-invasive BP--NBP (Adult, Pediatric, Neonatal); SpO2 --Masimo rainbow SET or Philips FAST (Adult, Pediatric, Neonatal); Pulse Rate -- PR -- derived from SpO2 or NBP (Adult, Pediatric, Neonatal); Temperature-Predictive, Temporal (Adult, Pediatric, Neonatal); end tidal CO2--etCO2 (Adult, Pediatric, Neonatal); Respiration Rate: airway respiration--awRR (Adult, Pediatric, Neonatal); Respiration Rate: acoustic respiration--RRa (Adult, Pediatric);

Non-invasive Total Hemoglobin--SpHb (Adult, Pediatric)

Contra-indications: Not for transport outside the healthcare facility. Not for use in home setting.

The subject device EarlyVue VS30 is a platform redesigned from the predicate device Suresign VS4 to provide the measurement of the same physiological parameters. It is a multi-parameter compact, portable monitor, offering several configurations and optional features that are intended to meet the customer's needs. The VS30 is designed with a simple, intuitive user interface for ease of operation. It is used to measure or monitor NBP, SpO2, SpHb, RRa, CO2 and optional temperature primarily in non-acute settings.

The subject VS30 also provides the wireless option. The wireless functions for VS30 are for the monitors to communicate with the hospital EMR system or to communicate with Philips IGS software over the hospital's wireless infrastructure.

Here's an analysis of the provided text regarding the acceptance criteria and the study that proves the device meets them:

Device: EarlyVue VS30 Vital Signs Monitor

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

The acceptance criteria for the EarlyVue VS30 are implied by its comparison to the predicate device, Philips SureSigns VS4. The document asserts that the VS30 has the "same fundamental technological characteristics" and that "performance data demonstrates the subject device Early Vue VS30 is as safe and effective as the predicate device for all the measurements." Therefore, the predicate device's specifications serve as the de facto acceptance criteria for each measurement parameter.

Ask a specific question about this device

The 3D Endoscope Module of the VS3-IR System is intended for viewing internal surgical sites during general surgical procedures, for use in visualization of ventricles and structures within the brain during neurological surgical procedures, viewing internal surgical sites during anterior spinal procedures, such as nucleotomy, discectomy, and foraminotomy, and shoulder and knee arthroscopic procedures.

The MMS configuration of the Iridium Module of the VS3-IR System is intended for capturing fluorescent images for the visual assessment of blood flow, as an adjunctive method for the evaluation of tissue perfusion, and related tissue-transfer circulation in tissue and free flaps used in plastic, micro- and reconstructive surgical procedures.

The Endoscope configuration of the Iridium Module of the VS3-IR System is intended to provide real-time endoscopic visible and near infrared fluorescence imaging. Iridium Endoscope enables surgeons to perform routine visible light endoscopic procedures as well as further visually assess vessels, blood flow and related tissue perfusion with near infrared imaging during minimally invasive surgery.

Not Found

I am sorry, but the provided text does not contain information about acceptance criteria or a study proving device performance for the Medtronic Vs3-ir device. The document is an FDA 510(k) clearance letter confirming substantial equivalence to legally marketed predicates and outlining the device's indications for use. It does not include details on specific performance metrics, study designs, sample sizes, expert qualifications, or ground truth establishment.

Therefore, I cannot generate the requested table and descriptions based on this input.

Ask a specific question about this device

Indications for Use for SureSigns VS3 Vital Signs Monitor

The SureSigns VS3 vital signs monitor is for use by health care professionals whenever there is a need for monitoring the physiological parameters of patients. The SureSignsVS3 is for monitoring, recording and alarming of multiple physiological parameters in healthcare environments for patient types listed below. Additionally, the monitor may be used in transport situations within a healthcare facility.

Parameter (patient types): NBP (Adult, Pediatric, Neonatal); SpO2 (Adult, Pediatric, Neonatal); Temperature (Adult, Pediatric, Neonatal)

Contraindications: Not for transport outside the healthcare facility

Indications for Use for SureSigns VS4 Vital Signs Monitor

The SureSigns VS4 vital signs monitor is for use by health care professionals whenever there is a need for monitoring the physiological parameters of patients. The SureSigns VS4 is for monitoring, recording and alarming of multiple physiological parameters in healthcare environments for patient types listed below. Additionally, the monitor may be used in transport situations within a healthcare facility.

Parameter (patient types): NBP (Adult, Pediatric, Neonatal); SpO2 (Adult, Pediatric, Neonatal); Temperature (Adult, Pediatric. Neonatal); CO2 (Adult, Pediatric. Neonatal); RRa (Adult, Pediatric); SpHb (Adult, Pediatric)

Contraindications: Not for transport outside the healthcare facility

The subject VS3 and VS4 will be modified with the current QuickAlert to include On-device multi-parameter configurable Modified Early Warning Scores (MEWS).

The provided text describes a 510(k) premarket notification for Philips SureSigns VS3 and VS4 Vital Signs Monitors. This document asserts substantial equivalence to previously cleared devices rather than providing a detailed study proving the device meets specific acceptance criteria with new clinical trials.

The modifications to the devices (VS3 and VS4) involve adding "On-device multi-parameter configurable Modified Early Warning Scores (MEWS)" to the existing QuickAlert functionality. The document states that there are no additions, deletions, or changes to the current measurements or alarming, nor any specification changes to the current SureSigns VS3 or SureSigns VS4 monitors.

Therefore, the information you requested regarding acceptance criteria and a study proving the device meets those criteria, particularly in the context of new clinical performance outcomes, is not explicitly detailed in this 510(k) summary. The summary focuses on demonstrating that the modified devices function as intended without adverse impact on safety or effectiveness and are substantially equivalent to their predicate devices.

However, I can extract information related to the verification, validation, and testing activities mentioned, which implicitly served to meet the acceptance criteria for the added MEWS functionality and device safety/performance.

Here's a breakdown of the available information based on your request:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

The document does not provide a formal table of explicit acceptance criteria with quantitative performance metrics for the added MEWS functionality. It generally states:

2. Sample Size Used for the Test Set and Data Provenance

The document states: "Testing involved system level tests, performance tests and tests according risk assessment." It does not specify the sample size for the test set (e.g., number of patients or data points) or the data provenance (e.g., country of origin, retrospective or prospective). Given the nature of a 510(k) for a modification to a vital signs monitor primarily focused on a new scoring algorithm, the testing likely involved a combination of simulated data, historical patient data for algorithm validation, and/or in-house testing, rather than a large prospective clinical study.

3. Number of Experts Used to Establish Ground Truth for the Test Set and Qualifications

This information is not provided in the document. For a MEWS system, ground truth would typically involve clinical experts determining actual patient deterioration or risk, but the document does not elaborate on how the MEWS algorithm's performance was validated against expert judgment.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set

This information is not provided in the document.

5. Multi-Reader Multi-Case (MRMC) Comparative Effectiveness Study

A MRMC comparative effectiveness study was not performed or reported in this 510(k) summary. The document focuses on the technical verification of the device and its software modification, not a study evaluating human reader improvement with or without AI assistance.

6. Standalone (Algorithm Only Without Human-in-the-Loop Performance) Study

The document implies that "performance tests" were conducted, which would likely include testing the MEWS algorithm's output in a standalone manner. However, it does not explicitly describe a dedicated standalone study with specific metrics for the algorithm's performance independent of user interpretation or intervention. The MEWS is "On-device," suggesting it provides scores for healthcare professionals to act upon, but its isolated performance metrics are not detailed.

7. Type of Ground Truth Used

The document does not specify the type of ground truth used for evaluating the MEWS functionality. For a risk-scoring system like MEWS, common ground truths might include subsequent clinical events (e.g., ICU admission, cardiac arrest, death), expert clinical assessment, or established clinical criteria for deterioration.

8. Sample Size for the Training Set

The document does not specify the sample size for any training set. It's common for MEWS algorithms to be based on established clinical scoring systems rather than de novo machine learning models requiring extensive training data. If machine learning was used for the "configurable" aspect, the training set size is not disclosed.

9. How the Ground Truth for the Training Set Was Established

Since no training set is mentioned, the method for establishing its ground truth is also not provided.

In summary, this 510(k) notification emphasizes the substantial equivalence of the modified vital signs monitors to their predicate devices, particularly concerning the addition of configurable MEWS. It mentions verification and validation testing to ensure the device performs as specified and meets safety and effectiveness standards, but it lacks detailed quantitative data on clinical performance, sample sizes, expert involvement, or ground truth methodologies that would typically be found in a comprehensive clinical study report.

Ask a specific question about this device

The system is intended for viewing internal surgical sites during general surgical procedures, visualization of ventricles and structures within the brain during neurological surgical procedures, viewing internal surgical sites during anterior and posterior spinal procedures, such as nucleotomy, discectomy, and foraminotomy, and shoulder and large joint arthroscopic procedures.

The VS3 ETV endoscope is the same endoscope as the predicate VS3 with the addition of 3 working channels. The endoscope is designed and manufactured the same way. The endoscope is a rigid metal shaft that uses a proximal sensor module which is mounted onto a camera block on the proximal side of the endoscope (the handle). The endoscope uses stereoscopic images which are transmitted from the visual field at the distal end of the scope through an optical transmission (for left and right channels). The endoscope camera sensor module picks up the left and right images of the scene inside the body and delivers them to the external display. The endoscope incorporates fiber optic threads that transfer the light from the illumination unit to the surgical scene. The VS3 ETV endoscope contains 3 working channels. The endoscope utilizes the same principle of operation, software, system architecture, camera and visual viewing technologies, illumination sources, display monitors, carts, CCU and couplers as the predicate VS3.

Here's an analysis of the provided text regarding the acceptance criteria and study information for the VS3-ETV device:

The provided text is a 510(k) summary for the VS3-ETV, which is a modified version of the predicate device, the VS3 Stereoscopic High Definition Vision System (K141002). This document primarily focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence to a predicate device rather than presenting a standalone clinical study with detailed acceptance criteria and performance metrics for clinical outcomes.

Therefore, many of the requested details about a study proving the device meets acceptance criteria are not available in this type of document because the submission strategy is based on comparing technological characteristics and non-clinical performance to a cleared predicate.

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

The acceptance criteria are essentially derived from the technological characteristics of the predicate device and the established recognized standards the device conforms to. The "reported device performance" are the stated characteristics of the proposed device, which are shown to be equivalent to the predicate.

Explanation of "Acceptance Criteria" in this context: For a 510(k) submission showing substantial equivalence, the "acceptance criteria" are not typically clinical performance metrics with target values (e.g., sensitivity, specificity). Instead, they are the demonstration that the modified device's technological characteristics and non-clinical performance (e.g., safety, sterilization) are either identical or equivalent to the predicate device, or that any differences do not raise new questions of safety or effectiveness.

2. Sample Size Used for the Test Set and Data Provenance

• Sample Size: The document does not describe a clinical "test set" in terms of patient data. The "performance testing" mentioned refers to non-clinical tests like reuse validation, cleaning, disinfection, and sterilization. The sample size for these non-clinical tests (e.g., number of instruments tested for sterilization cycles) is not provided.
• Data Provenance: Not applicable as it's not a clinical study on patient data. The non-clinical tests were likely conducted by the manufacturer, Visionsense Ltd., in Israel or a contract testing lab.

3. Number of Experts Used to Establish the Ground Truth for the Test Set and Qualifications of those Experts

• Number of Experts/Qualifications: Not applicable. There is no mention of a human-read clinical test set or ground truth established by experts in this 510(k) summary. The performance data presented are physical/technical specifications and results from non-clinical validation tests.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set

• Adjudication Method: Not applicable. No clinical test set requiring adjudication is described.

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

• MRMC Study / Effect Size: Not applicable. This device is an endoscope/vision system, not an AI diagnostic algorithm for image interpretation. There is no mention of AI assistance for human readers or an MRMC study.

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

• Standalone Performance: Not applicable. This is a hardware device (endoscope system), not a standalone algorithm.

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

• Ground Truth: Not applicable in the traditional sense of a diagnostic device. For the technical performance characteristics, the "ground truth" would be established by direct measurement with calibrated instruments (e.g., optical resolution charts for horizontal/vertical resolution, rulers for working distance). For the non-clinical tests like sterilization, the ground truth is established by validated laboratory methods (e.g., biological indicators for sterility assurance).

8. The sample size for the training set

• Training Set Sample Size: Not applicable. This is a hardware device, not a machine learning algorithm that requires a training set.

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

• Ground Truth for Training Set: Not applicable. (See #8)

Summary of Device and Study Focus:

The VS3-ETV is an endoscope system. The 510(k) submission focuses on demonstrating that the modified device (VS3-ETV, with added working channels) is substantially equivalent to a previously cleared predicate device (VS3, K141002). This means the primary "study" involved comparing the technical specifications and conducting non-clinical performance tests (reuse, cleaning, disinfection, sterilization) to show that the addition of working channels does not introduce new safety or effectiveness concerns compared to the predicate. The reference device K983365 (Aesculap Minop System) was used to establish precedence for the irrigation and working channels concept itself. There is no mention of clinical trials or studies involving patient data to establish new clinical performance criteria for this modification.

Ask a specific question about this device

The 3D Endoscope Module of the VS3-IR System is intended for viewing internal surgical sites during general surgical procedures, for use in visualization of ventricles and structures within the brain during neurological surgical procedures, viewing internal surgical sites during and posterior spinal procedures, such as nucleotomy, discectomy, and foraminotomy, and shoulder and knee arthroscopic procedures.

The MMS configuration of the Iridium Module of the VS3-IR System is intended for capturing fluorescent images for the visual assessment of blood flow, as an adjunctive method for the evaluation of tissue perfusion, and related tissue-transfer circulation in tissue and free flaps used in plastic. micro- and reconstructive surgical procedures.

The Endoscope configuration of the Iridium Module of the VS3-IR System is intended to provide real-time endoscopic visible and near infrared fluorescence imaging. Iridium Endoscope enables surgeons to perform routine visible light endoscopic procedures as well as further visually assess vessels, blood flow and related tissue perfusion with near infrared imaging during minimally invasive surgery.

The VS3-IR System is made up of the following components:

• VS3 3D Endoscope (K123467, K141002, K131434)
• VS3-IR-MMS & ICG Kit (K150018)
• VS3-IR-Endoscope & ICG Kit (not yet assigned).

The VS3 3D endoscopes (cleared in K123467, K131434, and K141002) are based on the proximal camera concept with a stereoscopic camera block on the proximal side of the endoscope (the handle). The stereoscopic images are transmitted from the visual field at the distal tip of the endoscope to the proximal camera block through an optical transmission system to PC workstations or external display monitors for enhanced viewing or capturing. VS3 includes reusable endoscopes which are cleaned and sterilized using the same methods and are indicated for the same lifecycle.

In addition to traditional endoscopic procedures, VS3-IR system includes support for Infrared (IR) Fluorescence visualization (hereafter referred to as Iridium utilizes the VS3 system with scopes that support IR fluorescence visualization. VS3 Iridium Miniature Microscope (VS3-IR-MMS) which was cleared in K150018 is positioned 20cm to 45cm above the patient during an open procedure. The proposed Iridium Endoscopes (VS3-R-Endoscope) is used during laparoscopic minimally invasive procedures. VS3 Iridium MMS and Endoscopes are designed to work with an approved IR fluorescence dve (Indocvanine Green or ICG), which has excitation at 805nm and emission band between 825nm and 850nm. VS3 Iridium (VS3-IR) provides excitation light to the surgical field to excite the dye molecules and captures emission from the dye using an IR camera.

Both the Iridium MMS and Iridium Endoscope utilize the left channel of the VS3 imaging system (camera and image processor) for IR fluorescence imaging and the right channel for visible light imaging. This structure allows fluorescence imaging to use the same acquisition and processing pathways as the approved 3D endoscopes (cleared in K123467, K131434, and K141002).

The provided document describes the acceptance criteria and study for the Visionsense VS3-IR System, specifically focusing on the VS3-IR-Endoscope component.

Here's a breakdown of the requested information:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

The document does not explicitly present a table of "acceptance criteria" with quantitative metrics alongside "reported device performance" in a separate column. Instead, it states that the device "met all performance acceptance criteria" during bench testing. The closest we can get to structured criteria are the functional requirements and the successful detection and visualization described.

2. Sample Size Used for the Test Set and the Data Provenance

The document describes bench testing, which typically does not involve a "test set" in the sense of clinical cases or data. The testing involved simulating a surgical field.

• Sample Size: Not applicable in the context of clinical data. The testing was conducted on the device itself and its ability to perform certain functions in a simulated environment.
• Data Provenance: Not applicable as it's bench testing, not clinical data. The testing was performed by Visionsense Ltd.

3. Number of Experts Used to Establish the Ground Truth for the Test Set and the Qualifications of Those Experts

• Number of Experts: Not mentioned. Bench testing usually relies on engineering and scientific personnel to verify device function against specifications.
• Qualifications of Experts: Not specified.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set

• Adjudication Method: Not applicable. Bench testing for functional verification does not typically involve an adjudication process by human experts in the same way clinical data evaluation would.

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

• MRMC Study: No, an MRMC comparative effectiveness study was not done. The document describes bench testing of the device's functional performance, not a study of human reader improvement with or without AI assistance. The device is for visualization, not an AI diagnostic tool that assists human readers.

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

• Standalone Performance: The study focuses on the standalone performance of the device's imaging capabilities. It verified that the device, without human interpretation for evaluation of its own core function, could detect and visualize fluorescence. However, the device itself is a "human-in-the-loop" tool, as it's an endoscope for surgeons to use for visualization. The bench testing verified the device's ability to produce the images that a human user would then interpret.

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

• Type of Ground Truth: For the bench testing, the "ground truth" was established by the physical and chemical principles of fluorescence (ICG excitation and emission) and the known properties of the simulated surgical field. The expectation was that the device would accurately capture and display this known phenomenon. It's a functional ground truth, verified by the correct operation of the system (laser excitation triggering fluorescence, detection by IR camera, and appropriate image fusion).

8. The sample size for the training set

• Sample Size for Training Set: Not applicable. This document describes the functional testing of a medical device (endoscope), not the development or training of an AI algorithm from a dataset.

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

• Ground Truth for Training Set: Not applicable as no training set for an AI algorithm is mentioned or implied.

Ask a specific question about this device

The SureSigns VS3 vital signs monitor is for use by health care professionals whenever there is a need for monitoring the physiological parameters of patients. The SureSignsVS3 is for monitoring, recording and alarming of multiple physiological parameters in healthcare environments for patient types listed below. Additionally, the monitor may be used in transport situations within a healthcare facility.

The SureSigns VS4 vital signs monitor is for use by health care professionals whenever there is a need for monitoring the physiological parameters of patients. The SureSigns VS4 is for monitoring, recording and alarming of multiple physiological parameters in healthcare environments for patient types listed below. Additionally, the monitor may be used in transport situations within a healthcare facility.

The subject devices are SureSigns VS3 and SureSigns VS4 multi-parameter patient monitors. Modifications include adding connectivity to IntelliVue GuardianSoftware (IGS), adding Temporal Temperature measurement to VS3, and other enhancements such as additional title bar indicators, expanded patient records pane, display patient name or primary ID, expanded QuickCapture entries, default CO2 setting alignment (VS4 only), temperature high and low alarms color change, increased SpO2 alarm delay defaults, option to prevent inadvertently clearing NBP programs, and RFID patient ID entry.

This document describes the Philips SureSigns VS3 and VS4 Vital Signs Monitors, which are multi-parameter patient monitors. The submission is a 510(k) premarket notification for modifications to previously cleared devices.

Here's an analysis of the acceptance criteria and study information provided, focusing on what can be extracted from the text:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

The document broadly states that "Pass/Fail criteria were based on the specifications cleared for the subject device." However, it does not explicitly list specific numerical acceptance criteria for performance metrics (e.g., accuracy ranges for NBP, SpO2, Temperature, CO2). Instead, it confirms that the device reportedly meets these implicit criteria.

2. Sample Size Used for the Test Set and Data Provenance

The document does not provide details on the sample size used for the test set.
It also does not specify the data provenance (e.g., country of origin, retrospective or prospective). The testing appears to be internal validation by Philips Medical Systems.

3. Number of Experts Used to Establish the Ground Truth for the Test Set and Qualifications of Those Experts

This information is not provided in the document. The testing described is verification, validation, and performance testing, which typically involves comparing device outputs to a known reference standard (e.g., calibration equipment, established measurement methods) rather than human expert-established ground truth in a clinical scenario.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set

This information is not provided. Given the nature of the device (monitoring physiological parameters), "adjudication" in the sense of resolving discrepancies between human experts for a diagnostic task is unlikely to be relevant here. The testing would involve comparing device readings against a gold standard or reference measurement.

5. If a Multi-Reader Multi-Case (MRMC) Comparative Effectiveness Study Was Done, and Effect Size of Human Improvement

No, a Multi-Reader Multi-Case (MRMC) comparative effectiveness study was not done. This type of study is typically for diagnostic imaging devices where human readers interpret images with and without AI assistance. The SureSigns VS3 and VS4 are vital signs monitors, not diagnostic imaging devices designed for human interpretation of complex data patterns in the same way. The modifications focus on software connectivity, a new temperature measurement accessory, and feature enhancements.

6. If a Standalone (i.e., algorithm only without human-in-the-loop performance) Was Done

The document describes "system level tests, performance tests, and safety testing from hazard analysis." This strongly implies that standalone performance testing was done for the device's functions (e.g., accuracy of NBP, SpO2, Temperature measurements). The software verification and validation, along with compliance to specific standards for temperature measurement, suggest testing of the algorithms and hardware in a standalone capacity against reference standards. However, "standalone" in the context of an AI algorithm is typically for diagnostic or predictive AI, which this device, in its described modifications, does not appear to be. It's a measurement device.

7. The Type of Ground Truth Used

The ground truth used for these types of physiological parameter monitors would typically involve:

• Reference standard instruments: Highly accurate and calibrated devices used to establish the true value of parameters like NBP, SpO2, and Temperature.
• Known physical inputs: For example, precise temperature probes, blood pressure simulators, or SpO2 simulators with defined oxygen saturation levels.
• Compliance with industry standards: The mention of ISO 80601-2-56 for temperature indicates that the ground truth for temperature measurement accuracy would be established by following the specific protocols and reference measurements outlined in that standard.

The document does not explicitly state "expert consensus" or "pathology" as ground truth, which are more relevant for diagnostic AI applications.

8. The Sample Size for the Training Set

The document does not describe any "training set." This is because the device, based on the provided information, is a vital signs monitor and not an AI/ML-based diagnostic or predictive system that requires a training set for model development. The focus is on measurement accuracy and software functionality.

9. How the Ground Truth for the Training Set Was Established

Since there is no mention of a training set, this information is not applicable/provided.

Ask a specific question about this device

The Endoscope Module of the VS3-IR-MMS System is intended for viewing internal surgical sites during general surgical procedures, for use in visualization of ventricles and structures within the brain during neurological surgical procedures, viewing internal surgical sites during anterior spinal procedures, such as nucleotomy, discectomy, and foraminotomy, and shoulder and knee arthroscopic procedures. The Iridium Module of the VS3-IR-MMS System is intended for capturing and viewing fluorescent images for the visual assessment of blood flow, as an adjunctive method for the evaluation of tissue perfusion, and related tissue-transfer circulation in tissue and free flaps used in plastic, micro- and reconstructive surgical procedures.

The VS3-IR-MMS System consists of the cleared base system and the Iridium Module that is the subject of this submission. The currently marketed VS3 system with endoscope functionality was cleared under the following product codes: GCJ (General Surgery Endoscope), GWG (Neurological Endoscope), and HRX (Orthopedic Arthroscope). The cleared base system consists of the following components and accessories: High Definition 3D Endoscope, High Definition 3D Camera with 3 control buttons and a focus adjustment knob, 2D Coupler, CCU, Light Source, and Display Monitor. The VS3-IR-MMS System that is the subject of this submission contains the previously cleared components of the cleared base system listed above, as well as a High Definition IR Fluorescence Scope (MMS), a Laser Light Source (LLS), associated software and VS, Iridium IR Fluorescence Kit. The new Iridium Module, which uses the newly added High Definition IR Fluorescence Scope (MMS) and a Laser Light Source (LLS), as well as the cleared High Definition 3D Camera, Camera Control Unit (CCU), and Display Monitor, is used to generate florescence excitation illumination for external use in capturing and viewing fluorescent images for the visual assessment of blood flow, as an adjunctive method for the evaluation of tissue perfusion, and related tissue-transfer circulation in tissue and free flaps used in plastic, micro- and reconstructive surgical procedures.

The document describes the VS3-IR-MMS System and its Iridium Module, which is intended for capturing and viewing fluorescent images for the visual assessment of blood flow as an adjunctive method. The submission focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence to a predicate device, the Novadaq Technologies SPY Imaging System (K063345), rather than setting specific performance acceptance criteria for the new module.

Here's an analysis of the provided information regarding acceptance criteria and the study:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

The document does not explicitly state quantitative acceptance criteria for the Iridium Module's performance in terms of metrics like sensitivity, specificity, or accuracy. Instead, it relies on demonstrating that the device "functions as intended" and "met all performance acceptance criteria" based on bench testing and limited human subject evaluations. The primary "acceptance criteria" presented are related to regulatory standards compliance and functional equivalence to the predicate.

2. Sample Size Used for the Test Set and Data Provenance

• Bench Testing:
  • ICG in sterile water: A single sample of 10mg ICG diluted to 2 ug/ml.
  • ICG through chicken skin: A single sample of ICG in sterile water covered with chicken skin.
• Human Simulation: A human hand was used. (Sample size: 1)
• Human Subjects: "Several human subjects" were evaluated in free flaps. (Exact sample size not specified, but implied to be small).
• Data Provenance: The human hand simulation and human subject evaluations were conducted "outside of the United States." The context suggests these were prospective evaluations, albeit limited.

3. Number of Experts Used to Establish the Ground Truth for the Test Set and Qualifications of Those Experts

The document does not specify the number or qualifications of experts used to establish ground truth for the test sets. The interpretations of "good quality imaging" during bench testing and "functions as intended" or "no adverse events" during human evaluations were likely made by the researchers or clinical personnel involved in the studies, but their specific expert qualifications are not detailed.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set

The document does not mention any formal adjudication method (e.g., 2+1, 3+1) for evaluating the test results. The assessment appears to be based on direct observation and qualitative judgment by the study personnel.

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 MRMC comparative effectiveness study was done. This device is not described as an AI-powered diagnostic or assistive tool for human readers in the traditional sense. It's an imaging system for visualizing blood flow.

6. If a Standalone (i.e., algorithm only without human-in-the-loop performance) Was Done

The device is an imaging system; it captures and displays images for human interpretation. The concept of "standalone algorithm only" performance, as it applies to AI/ML diagnostic tools, is not relevant here. The system's function is to provide the visual information.

7. The Type of Ground Truth Used (Expert Consensus, Pathology, Outcomes Data, etc.)

• Bench Testing: The ground truth was the known presence and concentration of ICG and the physical setup (ICG solution, ICG under chicken skin). Visual assessment of "good quality imaging" was the outcome.
• Human Simulation (Hand): The ground truth was the expected blood flow in a human hand after ICG administration. Visual assessment of corresponding dye fluorescence was the outcome.
• Human Subjects (Free Flaps): The ground truth was the actual tissue perfusion and related tissue-transfer circulation in free flaps. The assessment was that the device visualized blood flow and "functions as intended with no adverse events reported." This implies clinical observation of actual perfusion.

8. The Sample Size for the Training Set

No information is provided about a "training set" for the Iridium Module. The document describes a system with specific optical and imaging characteristics, not a machine learning model that requires a training set. The software modifications mentioned are likely for instrument control and image processing, not for AI model training.

9. How the Ground Truth for the Training Set Was Established

As no training set is mentioned in the context of machine learning, this question is not applicable.

Ask a specific question about this device