Search Results

The Flash-C PTCA Balloon Dilatation Catheter is indicated for balloon dilatation of the stenotic portion of a coronary artery or bypass graft for the purpose of improving myocardial perfusion.

The Flash-C PTCA Balloon Dilatation Catheter is a 0.014" guidewire-compatible, rapid exchange (RX) angioplasty balloon catheter with proximal anchoring. The device uses a dual balloon design featuring a compliant anchoring balloon, which enables the operator to precisely position the catheter at aorto-ostial anatomies and prevent distal migration of the balloon during angioplasty. The second semi-compliant high pressure balloon allows for luminal dilatation.

The provided text describes a medical device, the Flash-C PTCA Balloon Dilatation Catheter, and its performance evaluation for a 510(k) submission. However, it does not include information about AI/ML device performance, acceptance criteria, or a study comparing its performance against predefined criteria using metrics like accuracy, sensitivity, or specificity. The document focuses on regulatory approval based on substantial equivalence to existing devices and standard medical device performance testing, such as biocompatibility and bench testing.

Therefore, many of the requested sections about AI/ML performance, sample sizes for test/training sets, expert adjudication, or MRMC studies cannot be answered from the provided text.

Here's a breakdown of what can be extracted and what cannot:

1. A table of acceptance criteria and the reported device performance:

The document lists various performance bench tests and in-vivo testing, but it does not explicitly state acceptance criteria (e.g., "Balloon Burst Pressure must be > X psi"). It only states that the device "meet the established specifications necessary for consistent performance" and "meets all predetermined design verification and validation acceptance criteria." Without the specific criteria, a comparative table cannot be created.

2. Sample sized used for the test set and the data provenance (e.g. country of origin of the data, retrospective or prospective):

• Test Set Sample Size:
  • In-vitro Bench Testing: Not specified. Standard tests would involve multiple units, but the exact number isn't mentioned.
  • In-vivo Testing: "A swine model" was used. The number of animals in the test and control groups is not specified.
• Data Provenance: Not specified, but a swine model implies animal testing, likely in a controlled laboratory environment. The location of the testing is not mentioned.
• Retrospective/Prospective: The in-vivo study would be prospective in nature, as it involved performing a procedure and observing animals post-procedure.

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):

This information is not applicable and not provided. The ground truth for the device's performance is established through direct physical/biological measurements and observations in the bench and in-vivo tests, not by expert interpretation as would be the case for an AI/ML diagnostic device.

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

This is not applicable and not provided, as the tests performed are not based on subjective interpretation requiring adjudication.

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. This device is a physical medical device (catheter), not an AI/ML-driven diagnostic tool that assists human readers.

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

Not applicable. This device is a physical medical device.

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

• For Biocompatibility: Laboratory test results based on established ISO and ASTM standards (e.g., MEM Elution Assay results, Hemolysis Assay results).
• For In-vitro Bench Testing: Direct physical measurements against established engineering specifications (e.g., precise measurements of balloon crossing profile, rated burst pressure tests until failure).
• For In-vivo Testing: Physiological and clinical observations in the swine model post-procedure (e.g., assessment for downstream and cognitive effects).

8. The sample size for the training set:

Not applicable. This is not an AI/ML device, so there is no training set in the context of machine learning.

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

Not applicable, as there is no training set.

Ask a specific question about this device