Search Results
Found 1 results
510(k) Data Aggregation
(121 days)
The Diagnostic Ultrasound System Aplio i900 Model TUS-AI900, Aplio i800 Model TUS-AI800, and Aplio i700 Model TUS-AI700 are indicated for the visualization of structures, and dynamic processes with the human body using ultrasound and to provide image information for diagnosis in the following clinical applications: fetal, abdominal, intra-operative (abdominal), pediatric, small organs (thyroid, breast and testicle), trans-vaginal, trans-rectal, neonatal cephalic, adult cephalic, cardiac (both adult and pediatric), peripheral vascular, transesophageal, musculo-skeletal (both conventional and superficial), laparoscopic and thoracic/pleural. This system provides high-quality ultrasound images in the following modes: B mode, M mode, Continuous Wave, Color Doppler, Pulsed Wave Doppler, Power Doppler and Combination Doppler, as well as Speckle-tracking, Tissue Harmonic Imaging, Combined Modes, Shear wave, Elastography, and Acoustic attenuation mapping. This system is suitable for use in hospital and clinical settings by physicians or appropriately trained healthcare professionals.
In addition to the aforementioned indications for use, when EUS transducer GF-UCT180 and BF-UC190F are connected, Aplio i800 Model TUS-AI800/E3 provides image information for diagnosis of the upper gastrointestinal tract and surrounding organs, airways, tracheobronchial tree and esophagus.
The Aplio i900 Model TUS-AI900, Aplio i800 Model TUS-AI800 and Aplio i700 Model TUS-AI700, V9.0 are mobile diagnostic ultrasound systems. These systems are Track 3 devices that employ a wide array of probes including flat linear array, convex, and sector array with frequency ranges between approximately 2MHz to 33MHz.
This FDA 510(k) clearance letter details the substantial equivalence of the Aplio i900, Aplio i800, and Aplio i700 Software V9.0 Diagnostic Ultrasound System to its predicate device. The information provided specifically focuses on the validation of new and improved features, with particular attention to the 3rd Harmonic Imaging (3-HI), a new deep learning (DL) enabled filtering process.
Acceptance Criteria and Device Performance for 3rd Harmonic Imaging (3-HI)
| Acceptance Criteria Category | Specific Criteria | Reported Device Performance (3-HI) | Study Details to Support Performance |
|---|---|---|---|
| Clinical Improvement | Spatial Resolution: Demonstrate improvement relative to conventional 2nd harmonic imaging. Contrast Resolution: Demonstrate improvement relative to conventional 2nd harmonic imaging. Artifact Suppression: Demonstrate improvement relative to conventional 2nd harmonic imaging. | Scores for 3-HI were higher than the middle score of 3 (on a 5-point ordinal scale) for spatial resolution, contrast resolution, and artifact suppression, as rated by radiologists in a blinded observer study. | Test Set Size: 30 patients Data Provenance: U.S. clinical site, previously acquired data (retrospective). Ground Truth: Clinical images with representative abdominal organs, anatomical structures, and focal pathologies. Experts: Three (3) U.S. board-certified radiologists. Adjudication Method: Blinded observer study (comparison to images without 3-HI). MRMC Study: Yes, human readers (radiologists) compared images with and without 3-HI. The effect size is indicated by "scores for 3-HI were higher than the middle score of 3". |
| Phantom Study Objectives | Lateral Resolution: Demonstrate capability to visualize abdominal images better than conventional 2nd harmonic imaging. Axial Resolution: Demonstrate capability to visualize abdominal images better than conventional 2nd harmonic imaging. Slice Resolution: Demonstrate capability to visualize abdominal images better than conventional 2nd harmonic imaging. Contrast-to-Noise Ratio (CNR): Demonstrate capability to visualize abdominal images better than conventional 2nd harmonic imaging. Reverberation Artifact Suppression: Demonstrate capability to visualize abdominal images better than conventional 2nd harmonic imaging. Frequency Spectra: Demonstrate capability to visualize abdominal images better than conventional 2nd harmonic imaging. | All prespecified performance criteria were achieved. The phantom studies demonstrated the capability of 3-HI to visualize abdominal images better than conventional 2nd harmonic imaging across all specified metrics. | Test Set Size: Not explicitly stated for each metric but "five abdominal phantoms with various physical properties". Data Provenance: Phantom data. Ground Truth: Controlled phantom targets with varying depths, sizes, and contrasts. Experts: Not applicable (objective measurements). Adjudication Method: Not applicable (objective measurements compared to prespecified criteria). |
Detailed Study Information
1. Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance
(See table above)
2. Sample Size Used for the Test Set and Data Provenance
- 3rd Harmonic Imaging (3-HI) Clinical Evaluation:
- Sample Size: 30 patients.
- Data Provenance: Previously acquired data from a U.S. clinical site (retrospective). Patients were selected to ensure diverse demographic characteristics representative of the intended U.S. patient population, including a wide range of body mass indices (18.5-36.3 kg/m²), roughly equivalent numbers of males and females, and ages ranging from 23-89 years old.
- 3rd Harmonic Imaging (3-HI) Phantom Study:
- Sample Size: Five abdominal phantoms.
- Data Provenance: Phantom data.
3. Number of Experts Used to Establish the Ground Truth for the Test Set and Qualifications
- 3rd Harmonic Imaging (3-HI) Clinical Evaluation:
- Number of Experts: Three (3).
- Qualifications: U.S. board-certified radiologists.
4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set
- 3rd Harmonic Imaging (3-HI) Clinical Evaluation:
- Adjudication Method: Blinded observer study. The three radiologists compared images with 3-HI to images without 3-HI (predicate functionality) using a 5-point ordinal scale. The median score was then compared with the middle score of 3.
5. Multi-Reader Multi-Case (MRMC) Comparative Effectiveness Study
- Yes, a MRMC-like comparative effectiveness study was done for 3-HI's clinical evaluation.
- Effect Size: The statistical analysis demonstrated that scores for 3-HI were higher than the middle score of 3 for spatial resolution, contrast resolution, and artifact suppression. This indicates that human readers (radiologists) rated images with 3-HI as improved compared to those without.
6. Standalone (Algorithm Only Without Human-in-the-Loop Performance)
- Yes, a standalone study was performed for 3-HI in the phantom study. The phantom studies objectively examined lateral and axial resolution, slice resolution, contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR), reverberation artifact suppression, and frequency spectra without human interpretation.
7. The Type of Ground Truth Used
- 3rd Harmonic Imaging (3-HI) Clinical Evaluation:
- Type of Ground Truth: Expert consensus (from the three board-certified radiologists) on image quality metrics (spatial resolution, contrast resolution, artifact suppression) through a blinded comparison against predicate functionality. The initial selection of patient images included "representative focal pathologies" suggesting clinical relevance in the images themselves.
- 3rd Harmonic Imaging (3-HI) Phantom Study:
- Type of Ground Truth: Objective measurements against known physical properties and targets within the phantoms.
8. The Sample Size for the Training Set (for 3-HI)
- The document explicitly states that the "The validation data set [30 patients] was entirely independent of the data set used to train the algorithm during its development." However, the actual sample size for the training set is not provided in the given text.
9. How the Ground Truth for the Training Set Was Established (for 3-HI)
- This information is not provided in the given text, beyond the statement that the algorithm was "locked upon completion of development" and had "no post-market, continuous learning capability."
Ask a specific question about this device
Page 1 of 1