Search Results

When used as a pedicle screw fixation system of the non-cervical posterior spine in skeletally mature patients using allograft and/or autograft, the Erisma® LP Spinal Fixation System is indicated as an adjunct to fusion for the following indications:

• Deqenerative Disc Disease (discogenic pain with degeneration of the disc confirmed by history and radiographic . studies):
• . Degenerative spondylolisthesis with objective evidence of neurologic impairment;
• Severe spondylolisthesis (Grades 3 and 4) of the fifth lumbar-first sacral (L5-S1) vertebral joint; .
• Fracture ●
• . Dislocation
• Scoliosis .
• Kyphosis .
• . Spinal tumor
• . Failed previous fusion (pseudarthrosis)

The Erisma® LP instrumentation is designed for the surgical treatment of spinal pathologies. The treatment consists in the fusion of two or several vertebrae in order to restore spinal stability, with or without any other endocanalar concomitant surgical procedure.

The Erisma® LP spinal system is composed of rods (straight or pre-bent) fixed on the spine with pedicle screws. The Erisma® LP includes monoaxial and polyaxial pedicle screws (cannulated or not), monoaxial and polyaxial pedicle screws with breaking tabs, as well as transverse link which connects two rods altogether.

The implants used in the Erisma® LP system are available in a variety of diameters and lengths to accommodate patient anatomy and are made of medical grade titanium alloy per ASTM F136 or cobalt-chromium allov per ASTM F1537.

The Erisma® LP procedures are performed using a set of surgical instruments common for posterior spinal fixation approach. Most of the instruments provided are common surgical tools used in these types of posterior fixation of the spine.

This document describes the Clariance SAS Erisma® LP Spinal Fixation System, a medical device for spinal surgery. The information provided is from an FDA 510(k) summary. I will extract the requested information based on the provided text.

Based on the provided text, the Erisma® LP Spinal Fixation System is a mechanical device (spinal fixation system), not an AI/ML-driven diagnostic or assistive device. Therefore, many of the typical acceptance criteria and study characteristics for AI/ML devices (like human reader performance, ground truth establishment, training sets, etc.) are not applicable to this submission.

The acceptance criteria and study described here relate to the mechanical performance and material characteristics of the spinal fixation system.

Here's the breakdown of the requested information, adapted for a mechanical device:

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

   Acceptance Criterion	Reported Device Performance
   Dynamic Axial Compression per ASTM F1717	Performed and characterized the modification. The submission indicates the performance demonstrates the modified device is as safe and effective as the predicate device. Specific numerical results are not provided in this summary.
   Substantial Equivalence to predicate devices (K153326 and K130877)	Achieved. The modified device has the same intended use, similar indications, principles of operation, and technological characteristics. Performance data supports that it is as safe and effective.
   Material Composition	Cobalt-chromium alloy per ASTM F1537 (for new rods); medical grade titanium alloy per ASTM F136 (for other components).
   Dimensions and Design	Rods have similar dimensions and design as those already cleared under K153326 for the Erisma® LP predicate device.

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

   • Sample Size for Test Set: Specific numbers are not provided in this summary. Mechanical testing typically involves a set number of samples required by the standard (ASTM F1717).
   • Data Provenance: Not explicitly stated, but mechanical testing is typically performed in a laboratory setting. There is no indication of country of origin for the test data or whether it was retrospective or prospective, as these terms are usually applied to clinical studies.

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)

   • Not Applicable. For mechanical testing of a spinal fixation system, "ground truth" is established by the test standard (e.g., ASTM F1717) and the physical properties of the materials and design, not by expert consensus in the typical sense of clinical image review. The acceptance is based on meeting the performance requirements defined by the standard.

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

   • Not Applicable. Adjudication methods like 2+1 or 3+1 are used for reconciling discordant expert opinions in clinical studies (e.g., image interpretation). This is a mechanical device performance study, where acceptance is based on objective measurements against a standard.

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 mechanical device, not an AI/ML device, so MRMC studies involving human readers are not relevant.

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

   • Not Applicable. This is a mechanical device, not an algorithm.

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

   • Mechanical Standard Compliance/Predicate Equivalence: The "ground truth" for this device's performance is its compliance with recognized mechanical testing standards (e.g., ASTM F1717) and demonstrating substantial equivalence in performance and characteristics to legally marketed predicate devices.

8. The sample size for the training set

   • Not Applicable. This is a mechanical device, not an AI/ML algorithm that requires a training set.

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

   • Not Applicable. As there is no training set for a mechanical device, this question is not relevant.

Ask a specific question about this device