Search Results

The Single-use Ureteral Access Sheath is used to establish a conduit during endoscopic urological procedures facilitating the passage of endoscopes and other instruments into the urinary tract.

The Single-use Ureteral Access Sheath is a prescription device intended to provide physicians with access to the urinary tract and the capability to serve as a pathway for device exchanges. Similar to all ureteral access sheath sets, this device also safeguards the ureter during device exchanges, thus helping to minimize tissue trauma. The Single-use Ureteral Access Sheath consists of two components: the inner semi-rigid dilator assembly and the outer semi-rigid sheath assembly, both of which have a hydrophilic coating to allow for smooth and easy deployment into the upper tracts over a preplaced ureteral guidewire. The sheath has a locking mechanism that attaches to the luer lock hub of the inner dilator, allowing the sheath and dilator to move as a single unit. To ease the insertion of the Single-use Ureteral Access Sheath into the body orifice, the dilator is advanced over a 0.038 inch guidewire. Since both the sheath and dilator are radiopaque, they can be monitored using X-ray (fluoroscopy) to ensure their accurate positioning during the placement process. The Single-use Ureteral Access Sheath is designed to accommodate endoscopes and other urological instruments with an outer diameter (OD) that is compatible with the sheath's inner diameter (ID) of 10Fr, 11Fr, 12Fr, 13Fr, and 14Fr. The inner layer of the sheath is made of stainless steel to provide radial rigidity that remains patent and intact after the dilator is removed, allowing endoscopes and other urological instruments to pass easily along the lumen of the Access Sheath. The Single-use Ureteral Access Sheath is offered in five French size combinations: 10Fr/12Fr, 11Fr/13Fr, 12Fr/14Fr, 13Fr/15Fr, and 14Fr/16Fr, and four lengths: 35cm, 45cm, 50cm, 55cm. The device is constructed using biologically safe materials and is provided in a sterile condition, intended for single use only.

The provided 510(k) clearance letter is for a "Single-Use Ureteral Access Sheath" (K251599), which is a physical medical device and not an AI or software-based device.

Therefore, many of the requested points related to AI/software performance, such as:

• MRMC comparative effectiveness study
• Standalone (algorithm only) performance
• Sample size and ground truth for training set
• Number of experts and their qualifications for ground truth establishment
• Adjudication method for test set

do not apply to this device and its associated performance data.

The performance data provided in the 510(k) summary focuses entirely on non-clinical performance data for a physical device, including:

• Biocompatibility Testing
• Sterility Testing
• Functional and Mechanical Performance Testing (e.g., appearance, size, patency, breaking force, friction, etc.)

Based on the information provided in the 510(k) clearance letter for the Single-Use Ureteral Access Sheath (K251599), here's a breakdown of the requested information:

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

The document lists various performance tests conducted but does not explicitly state the quantitative acceptance criteria for each test or the specific numerical results obtained. It generally states that "All evaluation acceptance criteria were met" for biocompatibility and implies successful results for performance testing by concluding substantial equivalence.

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

The document does not specify the sample sizes used for the non-clinical performance and mechanical testing. It also doesn't mention data provenance in terms of country of origin or retrospective/prospective for this type of testing, as it's laboratory-based physical device testing, not clinical data or real-world usage data.

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

This concept (experts establishing ground truth) is not applicable to the non-clinical, physical device testing described. The "ground truth" for physical device performance is established by standardized test methods and engineering specifications.

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

Not applicable to non-clinical, physical device testing.

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 physical medical device, not an AI or imaging diagnostic software.

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

Not applicable. This is a physical medical device, not an algorithm.

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

For this device, the "ground truth" or reference standards are:

• Biocompatibility: ISO 10993-1:2018 (international standard for biological evaluation of medical devices).
• Sterilization: ISO 11607 (packaging for terminally sterilized medical devices) and ISO 11135 (ethylene oxide sterilization for medical devices).
• Functional/Mechanical Performance: Internal engineering specifications and established test methods for physical characteristics, likely derived from industry standards and predicate device performance.

8. The sample size for the training set

Not applicable. This is a physical device, not a machine learning model requiring a "training set."

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

Not applicable.

Ask a specific question about this device