Search Results
Found 1 results
510(k) Data Aggregation
(258 days)
The Wilson-Cook Biliary Introducer with Aspiration Biopsy Needle is used for aspiration biopsy in the biliary system, and if desired for the introduction of other biopsy instruments.
The Wilson-Cook Biliary Introducer with Aspiration Biopsy Needle consists of double lumen tubing, a 22 gauge needle and proximal hubs. This device is designed for insertion through the accessory channel of an endoscope, and may be placed over a previously positioned .035" wire guide. The catheter is advanced through the accessory channel, positioning the side ramp below the biopsy site. The needle is advanced and cells are aspirated using a 20 cc syringe. After cell collection, if desired, the needle can be removed, leaving the inner catheter in place for the introduction of other conventional biopsy instruments.
1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance:
| Acceptance Criteria | Reported Device Performance |
|---|---|
| Intended Use | Needle aspiration biopsy in the biliary system and if desired introduction of biopsy instruments. |
| Biocompatibility | Established through history of use in other similar medical devices. |
| Visual Analysis | All samples deemed acceptable, test specifications met. |
| Dimensional Analysis | All samples deemed acceptable, test specifications met. |
| Functional Analysis | All samples deemed acceptable, test specifications met. |
| Sterility | Validated EO cycle, following the AAMI Overkill Method to SAL 10-6. |
2. Sample Size for Test Set and Data Provenance:
The document does not specify a distinct "test set" sample size. Instead, it mentions that "Samples were subjected to visual, dimensional and functional analysis." The exact number of samples tested is not provided. The data provenance is internal to Wilson-Cook Medical Inc., conducted according to their "internal standard operating procedures for product qualification and process validation." No information is given regarding the country of origin of the data or whether it was retrospective or prospective.
3. Number of Experts and Qualifications for Ground Truth:
The document does not mention the use of experts to establish a ground truth. The evaluation appears to be based on internal product qualification and process validation, likely conducted by internal quality control or engineering personnel.
4. Adjudication Method:
No adjudication method is described. The acceptance seems to be based on individual samples meeting "test specifications."
5. Multi-Reader Multi-Case (MRMC) Comparative Effectiveness Study:
No MRMC comparative effectiveness study was mentioned or indicated. The document focuses solely on the device's own performance against internal specifications, not against human readers or other devices.
6. Standalone Performance (Algorithm Only):
This question is not applicable. The device is a physical medical instrument (Biliary Introducer with Aspiration Biopsy Needle), not an algorithm or software. Therefore, there is no "standalone" algorithmic performance to report.
7. Type of Ground Truth Used:
The ground truth for the device's performance appears to be based on internal test specifications and established engineering parameters for visual, dimensional, and functional analysis. For biocompatibility, the ground truth is "history of use in other similar medical devices." For sterility, it's adherence to the "AAMI Overkill Method to SAL 10-6."
8. Sample Size for Training Set:
The document does not refer to a "training set" in the context of device development or testing. The testing described is for product qualification and validation.
9. How Ground Truth for Training Set Was Established:
This question is not applicable as there is no mention of a "training set" for the device described.
Ask a specific question about this device
Page 1 of 1