Search Results

The AMSCO 600 Steam Sterilizers are designed for sterilization of heat and moisture-stable materials used in healthcare facilities and are equipped with the following factory-programmed cycles (Table 1):
The V-PRO maX 2 Low Temperature Sterilization System using VAPROX HC Sterilant is intended for use in the terminal sterilization of properly prepared (cleaned, rinsed and dried) medical devices in Healthcare Facilities. The preprogrammed sterilization cycles operate at low pressure and temperature, suitable for processing medical devices without leaving toxic residues.
The V-PRO s2 Low Temperature Sterilization System using VAPROX® HC Sterilant is intended for use in the terminal sterilization of properly prepared (cleaned, rinsed and dried) medical devices in Healthcare Facilities. The preprogrammed sterilization cycles operate at low pressure and low temperature, suitable for processing medical devices without leaving toxic residues.
The RAS Racks are used in the RAS Cycle of the AMSCO 7052HP Single-Chamber Washer/Disinfector and the AMSCO 7053HP Single-Chamber Washer/Disinfector for the effective cleaning, intermediate level disinfection and drying of reusable da Vinci® X/Xi and S/Si EndoWrist® instruments.

The AMSCO 600 Steam Sterilizer uses saturated steam, generated from a house steam utility (e.g. boiler system) or from a steam generator, to sterilize heat-stable health care products.
The V-PRO Low Temperature Sterilization System is a vaporized hydrogen peroxide sterilizer. It has the following pre-programmed cycles (the Lumen Cycle, the Non Lumen Cycle, the Flexible Cycle and the Fast Non Lumen Cycle). The V-PRO Low Temperature Sterilization System is intended for terminal sterilization of cleaned, rinsed, dried and packaged reusable surgical instruments used in healthcare facilities.
The V-PRO s2 Sterilizer executes four sterilization cycles (the Lumen, Non Lumen, Flexible Cycles and Fast Cycle). The V-PRO s2 Sterilizer contains a cabinetry modification and is free-standing.
The RAS Racks are designed to enable the mechanical cleaning, rinsing, and disinfection of up to twelve (12) robotic-assisted surgery instruments in a compatible washer-disinfector.

The provided text describes premarket notifications (510(k) summaries) for several sterilization and washer-disinfector systems, focusing on modifications to the control boards (using refurbished or slightly modified boards). It does not describe an AI/ML-based medical device. Therefore, the information required to answer the prompt regarding acceptance criteria and study proving device meets criteria (which typically applies to AI/ML device performance, ground truth establishment, expert review, MRMC studies, etc.) is largely not present in the provided document.

The document discusses acceptance criteria and study conclusions in the context of validating sterilization efficacy and proper operation of mechanical systems, not AI performance.

Therefore, for aspects related to AI/ML device performance (e.g., sample size for test/training sets, experts for ground truth, MRMC studies, etc.), the answer will be "N/A" (Not Applicable) or "Not relevant" because the document does not pertain to such a device.

Here's an attempt to extract relevant information wherever possible, and indicate N/A where the information is not provided or not relevant to the type of device described:

Device Category: Sterilization and Washer-Disinfector Systems (Mechanical/Chemical Medical Devices)

1. Table of acceptance criteria and the reported device performance:

Since this document describes multiple devices, I'll consolidate the general nature of the tests and criteria. The performance is consistently reported as "Pass" for all listed tests, indicating they met the defined acceptance criteria.

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

• Sample Size for Test Set: Specific numerical sample sizes for the "tests" listed (e.g., how many 1/2 cycle sterility tests were performed, on how many units, or specific amounts of biological indicators) are not detailed in this summary. The validation studies mentioned for different load configurations (e.g., "two instrument trays", "one pouched instrument tray", "two flexible endoscopes") relate to the type of load tested for sterilization efficacy, not the statistical sample size of individual tests.
• Data Provenance: The document does not specify the country of origin of the data or whether the studies were retrospective or prospective. These are typically controlled laboratory validation studies rather than clinical data collection.

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

• Not relevant. The "ground truth" for these devices, which are sterilizers/disinfectors, is typically established through microbiology (proving sterility/disinfection) and engineering evaluations (confirming operational parameters and software functionality), not through human expert interpretation of images or other data for diagnostic purposes. The "ground truth" is typically defined by the absence of microbial growth on biological indicators or the achievement of specified physical parameters (time, temperature, pressure).

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

• Not relevant. Adjudication methods like 2+1 or 3+1 are used in clinical studies where human experts are making subjective assessments that need to be reconciled (e.g., image interpretation). This document describes validation of mechanical systems and biological efficacy.

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:

• No, not done. MRMC studies are specific to evaluating the clinical impact of AI models on human reader performance, typically in diagnostic imaging. This document is about sterilizers and washer-disinfectors, which are not AI-assisted diagnostic tools.

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

• Not relevant. This question is formulated for an AI/ML algorithm. The "performance" of these devices is their ability to independently execute sterilization/disinfection cycles according to defined parameters and standards. The "software confirmation test" listed in the table is the closest equivalent, verifying the algorithm's (software's) proper operation.

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

• Biological/Physical Performance Ground Truth: For the sterility assurance tests, the ground truth is established by microbiological culture results (absence of growth on biological indicators) coupled with physical parameter monitoring (time, temperature, pressure). For the cleaning efficiency tests, the ground truth would similarly be based on pre-defined levels of contamination removal as verified by analytical methods, and the adherence to critical cycle parameters. This is not derived from expert consensus, pathology, or outcomes data in the way an AI diagnostic device would be.

8. The sample size for the training set:

• Not applicable. These devices are not AI/ML systems that undergo a "training" phase with a dataset in the conventional sense. The "training" for these systems would be the engineering design, development, and iterative testing/refinement of the hardware and embedded software.

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

• Not applicable. As above, there is no "training set" in the context of an AI/ML model for these devices. The "ground truth" for the development of these systems would be the established scientific principles of sterilization/disinfection and adherence to relevant industry standards (e.g., ANSI/AAMI ST79 for steam sterilization, or specific standards for low-temperature sterilization and washer-disinfectors).

Ask a specific question about this device