Search Results

The RxSight Insertion Device is indicated for the folding and insertion of a 3-piece silicone, intraocular lens into the human eye through a surgical incision. The RxSight Insertion Device is only for the Bausch & Lomb LI61A0 IOL and IOL models validated for use with this device in IOL approved labeling.

The RxSight Insertion Device is a two-part IOL injector device comprised of a re-usable handheld titanium injector, and a single use, non-preloaded disposable polypropylene cartridge intended to be used to fold and insert the intraocular lenses into the eye through a small incision.

Here's an analysis of the provided text regarding the acceptance criteria and study for the RxSight Insertion Device:

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

The provided text does not explicitly list "acceptance criteria" with specific pass/fail thresholds. Instead, it describes the types of performance tests conducted and states that the device "meets all product design requirements and applicable standards."

Based on the summary, we can infer the following performance evaluations:

2. Sample size used for the test set and the data provenance

• Sample Size for Test Set: The document mentions "two IOLs" for the pre- and post-injection evaluation of mechanical and optical properties. This is an extremely small sample size for a performance test. It does not provide sample sizes for other tests like biocompatibility or sterilization.
• Data Provenance: Not explicitly stated. These appear to be bench tests conducted by the manufacturer, but the location or specific context (e.g., in vivo, ex vivo, in vitro) is not detailed. There is no information about retrospective or prospective data collection from human subjects.

3. Number of experts used to establish the ground truth for the test set and the qualifications of those experts

Not applicable. The tests described are bench tests involving mechanical and optical measurements against ISO standards. There is no mention of expert-established ground truth or human readers involved in these performance tests.

4. Adjudication method for the test set

Not applicable. There is no mention of clinical endpoints or the need for adjudication as the tests are objective bench measurements.

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 an IOL insertion device, not an AI-powered diagnostic tool. Therefore, an MRMC study related to AI assistance for human readers is not relevant.

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

Not applicable. This device is a medical instrument, not an algorithm. Its performance is evaluated through its physical function and interaction with the IOL, not through an algorithm's output.

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

The "ground truth" for the performance tests appears to be defined by international standards (ISO 11979-2:2014, ISO 11979-3:2012, ANSI/AAMI/ISO 11135). The device's performance (e.g., maintaining IOL dimensions, sagitta, optical properties) is compared against requirements or expected values specified by these standards for pre- and post-injection conditions.

8. The sample size for the training set

Not applicable. This device is a mechanical instrument and does not involve machine learning or a training set.

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

Not applicable, as there is no training set for this device.

Ask a specific question about this device