Search Results

Cemented Aequalis Reversed prosthesis: It is indicated for patients with a functional deltoid muscle as a total shoulder replacement for the relief of pain and significant disability following arthropathy associated with the massive and non repairable rotator cuff-tear. This device is also indicated for the prosthetic revisions with massive and non repairable rotator cuff-tear. Only the humeral components are for cemented use. The glenoid implant is anchored to the bone with 4 screws and is for non-cemented fixation.

When during the primary surgery the glenoid bone stock appears to be insufficient to bear the reversed glenoid components or when glenoid bone fracture occurs during the surgical procedures, the hemi-prosthesis adaptor and the union screw can be adapted to the humeral components in order to transform the Aequalis Reversed prosthesis into a non reversed hemi-prosthesis.

When, in case of revision of a Aequalis Reversed prosthesis, the glenoid bone stock appears to be insufficient to again implant a base plate and a sphere of Aequalis Reversed range, the use of the hemi-prosthesis adaptor and the union screw allows for the transformation of the Aequalis Reversed prosthesis in to a non reversed hemi-prosthesis in order to avoid the revision of the humeral components.

Uncemented Aequalis Reversed prosthesis: It is indicated for patients with a functional deltoid muscle as a total shoulder replacement for the relief of pain and significant disability following arthropathy associated to massive and non repairable rotator cuff-tear. This device is also indicated for the prosthetic revisions with massive and non repairable rotator cuff-tear. The humeral components are for non-cemented use. The glenoid implant is anchored to the bone with 4 screws and is for non-cemented fixation.

When during the primary surgery the glenoid stock appears to be insufficient to bear the reversed glenoid components or when glenoid bone fracture occurs during the surgical procedures, the hemiprosthesis adaptor and the union screw can be adapted to the humeral components in order to transform the Aequalis Reversed prosthesis into a non reversed hemi-prosthesis.

When, in case of revision of an Aequalis Reversed prosthesis, the glenoid bone stock appears to be insufficient to again implant a base plate and a sphere of Aequalis Reversed range, the use of the hemi-prosthesis adaptor and the union screw allows for the transformation of the Aequalis Reversed prosthesis in to a non reversed hemi-prosthesis in order to avoid the revision of the humeral components.

Note: Titanium glenoid spheres are intended for patients with suspected cobalt alloy material sensitivity. The wear properties of Titanium and Titanium alloys are inferior to that of cobalt alloy. A Titanium glenoid sphere is not recommended for patients who lack a suspected material sensitivity to cobalt alloy.

The Aequalis Reversed Shoulder Prosthesis is intended to relieve pain and significant disability following massive and non repairable cuff-tear associated to arthropathy and following massive cuff-tear arthropathy. In this case, the rotator muscles of the shoulder (supraspinatus, teres minor and long head of the biceps) are no more useful for mobility, and only the deltoid (for abduction and external rotation) and the subscapularis (for internal rotation) are functional.

Therefore, the usual goal of such surgery is to restore the shoulder joint to facilitate its working condition and to reduce or eliminate pain. The Aequalis Reversed Shoulder Prosthesis is intended to accomplish these goals. Its reversed design allows to medialize the center of rotation of the shoulder, lengthening the deltoid muscle lever arm.

The Aequalis Reversed Shoulder Prosthesis is a semi-constrained system composed of a humeral and a glenoid parts.

The present device modification consists in the addition of glenoid sphere in Titanium.

This document describes a 510(k) premarket notification for the Aequalis Reversed Shoulder Prosthesis, specifically for a modification involving the addition of a titanium glenoid sphere. The FDA determined the device to be substantially equivalent to predicate devices.

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

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

The document does not specify the exact sample sizes (number of units tested) for each non-clinical test (pull-out, fatigue, wear). The data provenance is not explicitly stated in terms of country of origin but is from the manufacturer, Tornier SAS, based in France. The studies are non-clinical, likely prospective in design, rather than retrospective or based on human subject data.

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 is a submission for a medical device (shoulder prosthesis) and involves non-clinical mechanical and material testing. Therefore, there are no "experts" in the context of clinical interpretation or ground truth establishment from patient data. The "ground truth" for these tests are objective, measurable physical properties and performance metrics established by engineering standards and testing protocols.

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

Not applicable. As described in point 3, this is non-clinical testing. Adjudication methods like 2+1 or 3+1 are used for clinical studies involving reader agreement on interpretations (e.g., radiology images), which is not relevant here.

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 is a medical device (shoulder prosthesis) and not an AI/software device. No MRMC study was conducted.

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

Not applicable. This is a medical device (shoulder prosthesis) and not an AI/software device.

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

The "ground truth" for the non-clinical tests were the physical measurements and observations during standard engineering tests (pull-out strength, fatigue performance, wear rates). These are quantitative and objective metrics, not requiring expert consensus, pathology, or outcomes data in the traditional clinical sense.

8. The sample size for the training set

Not applicable. As described in point 3, this is non-clinical testing for a physical device, not an AI/software product requiring a training set.

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

Not applicable. As described in point 3, this is non-clinical testing for a physical device, not an AI/software product requiring a training set or its associated ground truth establishment.

Ask a specific question about this device