Search Filters

Search Results

Found 1 results

510(k) Data Aggregation

    K Number
    K210132
    Manufacturer
    Date Cleared
    2021-02-17

    (29 days)

    Product Code
    Regulation Number
    872.3640
    Panel
    Dental
    Reference & Predicate Devices
    Predicate For
    N/A
    AI/MLSaMDIVD (In Vitro Diagnostic)TherapeuticDiagnosticis PCCP AuthorizedThirdpartyExpeditedreview
    Intended Use

    s-Clean SQ-SL Implant System Regular is indicated for use in partially or fully edentulous mandibles and maxillae, in support of single- or multiple-unit restorations including; cemented retained, or overdenture restorations, and terminal or intermediate abutment support for fixed bridgework. This system is dedicated for one- and two-stage surgical procedures. This system is intended for delayed loading.

    Device Description

    This submission is to add new implants to the previously cleared device, s-Clean SQ-SL Implant System Regular (K192688). The newly added implant is "s-Clean SQ-SL Fixture with Ø5.2mm diameter".

    The s-Clean SQ-SL Implant System Regular is composed of a fixture and cover screw. The s-Clean SQ-SL Fixture is a thread-type implant made of Commercial Pure Titanium Grade 4 according to ASTM F67 which is placed in the alveolar bone to replace the function of the missing tooth. This device has a connection between the upper prosthesis and the internal Hex.

    The Fixture's surface is treated with SLA (Sandblasted with Large-grit and Acid-etching). It is the only part to be implanted into bone, to provide connection of prosthetic devices or other components of a dental implant set within the human body (mandibular or maxillary bone).

    AI/ML Overview

    The document details a 510(k) premarket notification for the "s-Clean SQ-SL Implant System Regular" and relies on substantial equivalence to a predicate device (K192688) rather than presenting new clinical study data with acceptance criteria that would typically be associated with AI/ML device performance.

    Therefore, the requested information elements related to AI/ML device performance, such as sample size for test set, data provenance, number of experts for ground truth, adjudication method, MRMC studies, standalone performance, type of ground truth, and training set details, are not applicable to this submission.

    The acceptance criteria provided in the document pertain to the physical and material characteristics, manufacturing processes, and sterilization validation of the dental implant, demonstrating its equivalence to the predicate device.

    Here's the information that can be extracted:

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

    Acceptance Criteria CategoryReported Device Performance (Leveraged from Predicate)
    Sterilization ValidationMet criteria of ISO 11137-1, 2, 3
    Shelf LifeMet criteria of ASTM F1980
    BiocompatibilityMet criteria of ISO 10993-1, 3, 5, 6, 10, 11
    Bacterial Endotoxin TestMet criteria of ANSI/AAMI ST72, USP <161>, USP <85>
    Surface ModificationSubstantially equivalent (SLA treated)
    MaterialCP Titanium Gr. 4 (ASTM F67 compliant)
    Indications for UseSame as predicate device (K192688)
    DiametersWithin range of predicate device diameters
    LengthsSame as predicate device (K192688)

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

    • Not Applicable. The submission leverages non-clinical test data from predicate devices (K192688 and K153639). No new clinical test set was used for the subject device to establish new performance metrics. The data provenance is implied to be from internal testing conducted by Dentis Co., Ltd. for the predicate devices.

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

    • Not Applicable. No new clinical test set requiring expert ground truth was performed for this 510(k) submission.

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

    • Not Applicable. No new clinical test set requiring adjudication was performed for this 510(k) submission.

    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 dental implant, not an AI/ML diagnostic tool. Therefore, MRMC studies and AI assistance comparisons are irrelevant.

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

    • Not Applicable. This device is a dental implant, not an AI/ML algorithm.

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

    • Not Applicable. The "ground truth" here refers to the compliance with established international and national standards (e.g., ISO, ASTM, ANSI/AAMI, USP) for medical device materials, manufacturing, and sterilization, as demonstrated by the predicate devices.

    8. The sample size for the training set:

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

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

    • Not Applicable. This device is a dental implant, not an AI/ML device.
    Ask a Question

    Ask a specific question about this device

    Page 1 of 1