Search Results

The TAS400 NeoTract Anchor System is intended for the approximation of tissue in open surgical procedures.

The TAS400 NeoTract Anchor System is used for the approximation of soft tissue in open surgical procedures. It consists of a single use delivery device that delivers the permanently implanted Suture Anchor. The delivery system is comprised of a polycarbonate handle and trigger assembly connected to a stainless steel shaft.

Here's an analysis of the provided text regarding the NeoTract Anchor System's acceptance criteria and study information:

Based on the provided 510(k) summary, the device is a surgical suture system, and the focus of its submission is on substantial equivalence to existing predicate devices, rather than a de novo clinical study with specific acceptance criteria related to diagnostic performance. Therefore, the information you're looking for, especially concerning diagnostic performance metrics, reader studies, and ground truth establishment, is largely not applicable in this context.

The "acceptance criteria" for this type of submission are primarily about demonstrating that the new device is as safe and effective as a legally marketed predicate device, often through in-vitro testing and material comparisons.

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

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

As this is a 510(k) for a surgical suture system seeking substantial equivalence to existing devices, specific "acceptance criteria" in terms of diagnostic performance (e.g., sensitivity, specificity, AUC) are not defined or reported. Instead, the acceptance criteria relate to the physical and functional properties of the device, which are evaluated through in-vitro testing.

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

• Test Set Sample Size: Not specified. The document only mentions "In-vitro testing" without detailing the number of units tested.
• Data Provenance: Not specified, but generally, in-vitro testing is performed by the manufacturer (NeoTract, Inc.) in a controlled laboratory setting. It is not patient or human data, so concepts like country of origin or retrospective/prospective do not apply.

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

• Not Applicable. For a surgical suture system's in-vitro testing, the "ground truth" isn't established by medical experts in the diagnostic sense. It's established by engineering specifications and standards for material properties, tensile strength, securement, etc. The "experts" involved would be engineers and quality control personnel assessing compliance with these specifications.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set

• Not Applicable. Adjudication methods like 2+1 or 3+1 are used in clinical studies involving human interpretation or challenging diagnoses. In-vitro testing relies on objective measurements against predefined engineering standards.

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

• No. An MRMC study is relevant for diagnostic imaging devices or algorithms that impact human reader performance. This device is a physical surgical implant, not a diagnostic tool.

6. If a Standalone (Algorithm Only Without Human-in-the-Loop Performance) Was Done

• Not Applicable. This is a physical medical device, not a software algorithm.

7. The Type of Ground Truth Used

• Engineering Specifications and Performance Standards. The "ground truth" for the in-vitro testing would be objective, measurable specifications for mechanical properties (e.g., strength, durability, securement), biocompatibility, and material integrity, defined by industry standards and the manufacturer's own design requirements.

8. The Sample Size for the Training Set

• Not Applicable. "Training set" refers to data used to train an AI algorithm. This device is a physical product, not an AI system.

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

• Not Applicable.

In Summary:

The provided 510(k) summary focuses on demonstrating the substantial equivalence of the NeoTract Anchor System to predicate devices for its intended use (approximation of tissue in open surgical procedures). The evaluation relies on in-vitro testing to confirm material suitability and performance against established specifications. The typical metrics and study designs associated with diagnostic AI or imaging devices (like acceptance criteria for sensitivity/specificity, reader studies, ground truth establishment by experts) are not relevant or present in this submission.

Ask a specific question about this device