Search Filters

Search Results

Found 1 results

510(k) Data Aggregation

    K Number
    K230119
    Manufacturer
    Date Cleared
    2023-05-02

    (105 days)

    Product Code
    Regulation Number
    892.2050
    Reference & Predicate Devices
    Predicate For
    N/A
    AI/MLSaMDIVD (In Vitro Diagnostic)TherapeuticDiagnosticis PCCP AuthorizedThirdpartyExpeditedreview
    Intended Use

    Ricoh 3D Anatomic Models are intended as physical replicas of patient anatomy to be used for diagnostic purposes in the fields of craniomaxillofacial, orthopedic, cardiovascular, neurological, gastrointestinal, genitourinary, and breast applications. The Anatomic Models are based on DICOM imaging information from a medical scanner and output files from FDA cleared software intended for the creation and output of digital files suitable for the fabrication of physical replicas. The models should be used in conjunction with other diagnostic tools and expert clinical judgement.

    Device Description

    The subject device, each "Ricoh 3D Anatomic Model," is a patient-specific physical replica of an anatomic structure or site, produced via additive manufacturing from a user generated 3D print file. The input 3D print file is created from medical images in DICOM format that have been seqmented to a specific reqion of interest within an FDA cleared application, IBM iConnect Access (K203104). The input 3D print file is then transferred to Ricoh for production and delivery of the physical replica.

    AI/ML Overview

    The provided text
    describes the acceptance criteria and the study that proves the device meets the
    acceptance criteria in the context of a 510(k) premarket notification for a 3D Anatomic
    Model.

    Here's the breakdown of the information requested based on the
    provided text:

    1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device

    Performance

    Acceptance CriteriaReported Device Performance
    Geometric accuracy of the physical replicas ("can be printed accurately at less than 1mm mean deviation when compared against the input digital 3D file")Testing showed that the physical models can be printed accurately at less than 1mm mean deviation when compared against the input digital 3D file.
    All clinically relevant acceptance criteria were met.All clinically relevant acceptance criteria were met. (Specific criteria are not enumerated, but the broad statement
    of meeting them is present.)
    Packaging adequately protects the product from damage throughout the distribution process.Testing showed that the packaging adequately protects the product from damage throughout the distribution process.

    2. Sample Size Used for the Test Set and Data Provenance

    • Sample Size for Test Set: The document does not explicitly state the specific
      sample size used for the geometric accuracy testing (e.g., number of models
      tested). It refers to "testing" and "assessment" but not quantitative sample
      sizes.
    • Data Provenance: The document does not specify the country of origin of the data
      or whether the study was retrospective or prospective. It describes "bench testing"
      and "simulated distribution and handling testing," which are laboratory/controlled
      tests rather than patient-data-driven clinical studies in the typical sense for an
      AI/imaging device.

    3. Number of Experts Used to Establish Ground Truth and

    Qualifications

    Not applicable. For this device (3D Anatomic Model), the "ground
    truth" for geometric accuracy is the input digital 3D file (the design spec).
    The product is a physical replica, and its accuracy is measured against the
    digital file itself, not against a human expert's interpretation of a medical
    image or a medical diagnosis. The document mentions "clinical user" approval of
    the model, but this is part of the workflow and quality process, not the
    ground truth establishment for performance testing.

    4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set

    Not applicable. As noted above, the primary performance test
    (geometric accuracy) compares the physical model directly to the digital input
    file. There is no human interpretation or subjective assessment that would
    require an adjudication method.

    5. If a Multi-Reader Multi-Case (MRMC) Comparative Effectiveness

    Study was Done

    No. The document makes no mention of an MRMC study. This type of
    study is typically performed for AI-powered diagnostic software to assess its
    impact on human reader performance. The device here is a physical replica
    generated from an existing cleared software's output, not a diagnostic AI
    algorithm.

    6. If a Standalone (Algorithm Only Without Human-in-the-Loop

    Performance) Study was Done

    Yes, in a way. The "Validation Testing" described, particularly the
    geometric accuracy assessment, represents a standalone performance test of the
    device's manufacturing capability to produce accurate physical models based on
    digital input. It assesses the output of the manufacturing process (the
    physical model) against its input (the digital file) without human
    intervention being a variable in the measurement of geometric accuracy itself.

    7. The Type of Ground Truth Used

    The ground truth for the device's performance (geometric accuracy)
    is the input digital 3D file from which the physical replica is printed.
    The physical model is compared directly to this digital file using measurement
    techniques to determine deviation.

    For the purpose of the device's function (being a physical replica
    for diagnostic purposes), the underlying "ground truth" of the patient's
    anatomy would stem from the original DICOM imaging information, which is then
    segmented by FDA cleared software to create the 3D print file. However, the
    performance assessment of this specific device (the physical model itself)
    uses the digital file as its reference.

    8. The Sample Size for the Training Set

    Not applicable. This device is a manufactured physical product (a 3D
    print) based on a digital file, not an AI/machine learning algorithm that
    requires a training set. The performance data relates to the manufacturing
    accuracy and physical integrity of the printed models, not to an algorithm's
    ability to learn from data.

    9. How the Ground Truth for the Training Set Was Established

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

    Ask a Question

    Ask a specific question about this device

    Page 1 of 1