Search Results

Flexible Partial Resin is indicated for the fabrication of dental appliances such as dental plates, bite plates, partial denture frame-works and clasps.

The subject device, Flexible Partial Resin, is a light-cured polymerizable resin for the fabrication of partial removable denture bases made in dental laboratories. The resin can be used in DLP printers utilizing a wavelength of 385nm and will be offered in G1 (standard pink), G3 (medium pink), and G4 (dark pink) shades formulated to match gingival tissue. The final medical device is a custom fitted appliance that is compliant to the dental professional's diagnosis and prescription.

The provided document is a 510(k) clearance letter for a dental resin, not a study report for an AI/ML device. Therefore, it does not contain the information requested in your prompt regarding acceptance criteria and studies for device performance as it pertains to an AI/ML device.

The document discusses the substantial equivalence of a new dental resin (Flexible Partial Resin) to a predicate device (Flexible Block) based on:

• Indications for Use Comparison: Both devices are indicated for fabricating dental appliances such as dental plates, bite plates, partial denture frameworks, and clasps. The predicate has additional indications not claimed by the subject device.
• Technological Comparison: The devices are compared based on material composition and principle of operation. The subject device uses a methacrylate/dimethacrylate-based resin and 3D printing (DLP), while the predicate uses polyamide and milling from blocks.
• Performance Testing: Non-clinical tests were conducted to compare the physical properties of the subject device to the predicate device using ASTM standards (Flexural Strength and Modulus, Tensile Strength, Elongation at Break, Impact Strength, Water Absorption). Printing accuracy was also tested.
• Biocompatibility: The subject device was evaluated per ISO 10993-1:2018, leveraging data from a reference device.

Key takeaway for your request:

The FDA 510(k) clearance letter for "Flexible Partial Resin" does not describe an AI/ML device or a study involving AI/ML performance. Therefore, it does not contain information about:

• Acceptance criteria and performance for an AI/ML device.
• Sample sizes for test sets, data provenance, or ground truth establishment relevant to AI/ML.
• Number of experts, adjudication methods, MRMC studies, or standalone algorithm performance for AI/ML.
• Training set size or ground truth for an AI/ML model.

This document is for a material used in dental device fabrication, not an AI-powered diagnostic or assistive tool.

Ask a specific question about this device

Partial Flex® is indicated for the fabrication of partial or full removable dentures, as well oclusional splints or night guards.

Partial Flex® dental resin is a polymer base material used for the fabrication of partial removable dentures and prosthesis. Partial Flex is made from a resin of polypropylene that is designed and manufactured for injection molding. Partial Flex® is available in two shades as a granular material (so-called pellets) contained in an aluminum tube with 27 g or in a plastic bag of 250 g. In addition to high biocompatibility, Partial Flex® material features hypoallergenic properties, no risk of discoloration and the dental prosthesis made are unbreakable, which differentiates the from acrylic materials. The resin material is pigmented in one color and without pigment presentation: Light pink and Natural color (without pigment).

The provided FDA 510(k) Clearance Letter for the device "Partial Flex" does not describe acceptance criteria, the study that proves the device meets acceptance criteria, or any details about AI/human reader studies.

The document primarily focuses on regulatory approval based on demonstrating substantial equivalence to a predicate device. It confirms that the device is a "Denture Relining, Repairing, Or Rebasing Resin" and lists some non-clinical performance tests conducted to show compliance with ISO standards (ISO 20795 and ISO 10993 for biocompatibility), but it does not provide specific acceptance values or the actual results of these tests beyond "passed the acceptance criteria" or "complies with the requirements."

Therefore, it's impossible to fill in the requested information based solely on the provided text. The prompt asks for details that are typically found in a clinical study report or a more detailed section of a 510(k) submission, neither of which is present in the provided clearance letter.

However, I can illustrate what a hypothetical response would look like if the information were available, using the structure of your request.

Hypothetical Response (Illustrative, as the provided document lacks the necessary data):

This document, an FDA 510(k) Clearance Letter, primarily focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence to a predicate device for regulatory clearance. It details non-clinical performance testing but does not contain the specific acceptance criteria, detailed study results, or information pertaining to AI performance, human reader studies, or ground truth establishment that would be required to fully answer the prompt. The information below is hypothetical and structured as if the data were present in the provided text.

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

2. Sample Sizes and Data Provenance

The provided document describes non-clinical bench testing and biocompatibility testing. It does not specify sample sizes for these tests, nor does it refer to patient data (e.g., medical images, clinical outcomes) that would typically have provenance data.

• Test Set Sample Size: Not applicable/Not specified in the provided document for human data or AI model evaluation. For bench tests, typical sample sizes are per ISO standards but not detailed here.
• Data Provenance: Not applicable for the type of testing described (bench and biocompatibility). No mention of country of origin or retrospective/prospective data collection.

3. Number of Experts and Qualifications for Ground Truth

Not applicable. The provided document describes material testing and biocompatibility. It does not involve human readers, clinical data interpretation, or AI ground truth establishment.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set

Not applicable. No expert review or clinical test set adjudication is described in the provided document.

5. Multi-Reader Multi-Case (MRMC) Comparative Effectiveness Study

Not applicable. This is a material science device (dental resin), not a diagnostic imaging or AI-assisted interpretation device. No MRMC study was performed or is relevant to this device's 510(k) submission as described.

6. Standalone Algorithm Performance

Not applicable. This device is a physical dental resin, not an algorithm or software.

7. Type of Ground Truth Used

The "ground truth" for the non-clinical tests described in the document (material properties and biocompatibility) would be based on:

• Established ISO Standards (e.g., ISO 20795 for dental base polymers, ISO 10993 for biocompatibility): These standards define the test methodologies and acceptable performance limits.
• Laboratory Measurements and Biological Assays: Objective, quantitative measurements performed in a laboratory setting (e.g., measuring flexural strength, assessing cell viability, observing tissue reactions in animal models).

There is no "expert consensus," "pathology," or "outcomes data" ground truth in the context of this 510(k) submission.

8. Sample Size for the Training Set

Not applicable. This device is a manufactured resin, not an AI model requiring a training set.

9. How Ground Truth for the Training Set Was Established

Not applicable. This device is a manufactured resin, not an AI model.

Ask a specific question about this device

FP3D is a dual cure resin indicated for the 3D printed fabrication of flexible partial dentures in dental laboratories.

The FP3D is designed for additive manufacturing on Carbon 3D printers (wavelength = 385 nm). FP3D is intended to be used within a computer-aided design and manufacturing (CAD/CAM) digital dentistry system that includes a 3D scanner, design software, 3D printer, post-cure unit (wavelength = 385-405 nm), and post-cure oven for the fabrication of flexible partial dentures for partially edentulous patients.

Acceptance Criteria and Device Performance for FP3D

This document analyzes the provided FDA 510(k) Clearance Letter (K250489) for the FP3D device to detail its acceptance criteria and the studies that prove its compliance.

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

The provided document details non-clinical performance testing against specific ISO and ASTM standards. The acceptance criteria are implicitly defined by these standards, and the "reported device performance" is the conclusion that the device "meets the requirements" or "was completed per" these standards. Specific numerical values for the performance are not provided in this summary.

Note: The FDA 510(k) summary typically summarizes the results rather than providing raw data or specific passing/failing values for each test. The statement "completed per" or "meets the requirements" implies that the device satisfied the acceptance criteria of the respective standards.

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

• Sample Size for Test Set: The document does not specify the sample sizes used for the physical and biocompatibility tests. It only states that "Nonclinical performance testing was conducted."
• Data Provenance: The document does not explicitly state the country of origin of the data or whether the tests were conducted retrospectively or prospectively. Given the nature of these tests (material properties and biocompatibility), they are typically conducted prospectively in a laboratory setting.

3. Number of Experts Used to Establish the Ground Truth for the Test Set and Qualifications

This information is not applicable to the provided extract. The tests described (physical properties and biocompatibility) are objective, laboratory-based evaluations against established international standards (ISO, ASTM). They do not involve interpretation by human clinicians or the establishment of "ground truth" by experts in the same way clinical diagnostic studies do. The standards themselves define the "ground truth" for performance.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set

This information is not applicable for the same reasons as point 3. Laboratory tests against standards do not typically involve adjudication methods like 2+1 or 3+1, which are characteristic of expert review for clinical judgments.

5. Multi-Reader Multi-Case (MRMC) Comparative Effectiveness Study

An MRMC comparative effectiveness study was not done. The document explicitly states: "Clinical Testing: Not Applicable." The device is a material for fabricating dentures, not a diagnostic imaging or AI-assisted diagnostic tool that would typically involve a multi-reader study.

6. Standalone (Algorithm Only Without Human-in-the-Loop Performance) Study

This information is not applicable. The FP3D is a material (resin) for 3D printing, not an algorithm or software device. Therefore, a standalone performance study for an algorithm is not relevant here.

7. Type of Ground Truth Used

The ground truth for the non-clinical performance tests was established by international standards and regulations:

• For physical properties: ISO 20795-1:2013 (Dentistry - Base polymers - Part 1: Denture base polymers), ASTM D348 (tensile properties), and ASTM D790 (flexural modulus).
• For biocompatibility: ISO 10993.

These standards define the acceptable range or criteria for the properties being tested.

8. Sample Size for the Training Set

This information is not applicable. The FP3D is a material (resin), not a machine learning model or algorithm that requires a training set.

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

This information is not applicable for the same reasons as point 8.

Ask a specific question about this device

SprintRay Apex Flex is an alternative to traditional thermoplastic material used for the fabrication and repair of partial dentures. It is intended exclusively for professional dental work.

SprintRay Apex Flex is a photo-polymeric methacrylate/acrylate resin material used in conjunction with a 3D printer and a scanned 3D image in a dental office to fabricate partial dentures by 3D printing layer upon layer of the composite material. The product is available in two shades: Light Pink and Standard Pink.

SprintRay Apex Flex resin is intended exclusively for professional dental work. Fabrication of dental prosthetics with SprintRay Apex Flex resin requires computer-aided design and CAD/CAM manufacturing system that includes the following components not part of the device: Apex Flex file created in an optical impression system, 3D printer, and curing light equipment.

Apex Flex resin is designed to meet appropriate ISO standards for flexibility and sorption, to withstand prolonged use in the oral cavity. It is delivered non-sterile, and instructions on curing, and cleaning the final device prior to providing it to a patient are provided in the device indication for use document.

The provided document is an FDA 510(k) clearance letter and supporting summary for a dental resin product, SprintRay Apex Flex. This document does not describe an AI/ML-enabled medical device or a study involving human readers and AI assistance for diagnostic purposes. Instead, it details the substantial equivalence of a new dental material (resin) to existing predicate devices based on physical, chemical, and biocompatibility properties.

Therefore, many of the requested elements pertaining to AI/ML device studies (e.g., test set data provenance, expert ground truth, adjudication methods, MRMC studies, standalone algorithm performance, training set details) are not applicable to this document.

However, I can extract the acceptance criteria and performance data for the material properties of the SprintRay Apex Flex device as presented in the document.

Analysis of Acceptance Criteria and Device Performance for SprintRay Apex Flex

The "acceptance criteria" for this device are implicitly derived from the performance of the predicate and reference devices, and conformance to industry consensus standards like ISO 20795-1. The SprintRay Apex Flex is demonstrated to be substantially equivalent to these devices by meeting comparable performance metrics.

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

The document presents a comparison of the SprintRay Apex Flex (Subject Device) against its primary predicate (Flex-Star V), secondary predicate (TCS® Unbreakable), and a reference device (SprintRay NightGuard Flex). The "acceptance criteria" are not explicitly stated as numerical thresholds but are implied by the measured values of the predicate devices, particularly the Flex-Star V as the primary predicate. The subject device must show comparable or improved performance without raising new safety or effectiveness concerns.

Summary of Device Performance: SprintRay Apex Flex demonstrates comparable or in some cases superior physical properties (e.g., flexural modulus, lower water sorption) compared to the predicate and reference devices, while meeting biocompatibility and other standard requirements.

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

The document does not specify a "test set" in the context of an AI/ML model for diagnostic performance. The "testing" refers to bench testing of material properties.

• Sample Size: The exact number of samples tested for each material property (e.g., flexural strength, sorption) is not provided. The results are reported with mean values and standard deviations, implying multiple samples were tested for each property as per ISO standards.
• Data Provenance: The data is generated from bench testing of the manufactured SprintRay Apex Flex resin. The "country of origin" for this data would be the location where these laboratory tests were conducted, which is not specified in the document but is typically part of the manufacturer's internal testing process. The nature of the data is prospective in the sense that the manufacturer specifically produced and tested samples of the Apex Flex resin for this 510(k) submission.

3. Number of Experts Used to Establish the Ground Truth for the Test Set and Qualifications of Those Experts

This question is not applicable as the document describes a material and its physical properties, not an AI/ML diagnostic device requiring expert interpretation for ground truth. The "ground truth" for material properties is established by standardized test methods (e.g., ISO 20795-1) and measurement equipment, not by human experts.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set

Not applicable. As the "test set" refers to material samples undergoing physical and chemical tests, there is no need for adjudicating human interpretations.

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 document pertains to a dental material, not an AI-assisted diagnostic device.

6. If a Standalone (i.e. algorithm only without human-in-the-loop performance) Was Done

Not applicable. This question refers to AI algorithm performance.

7. The Type of Ground Truth Used

The "ground truth" for this device's performance is based on standardized laboratory measurements of physical, mechanical, and chemical properties (e.g., flexural strength, water sorption) as defined by ISO consensus standards (specifically ISO 20795-1 and ISO 10993-1/7405 for biocompatibility). There is no "expert consensus" or "pathology" in the context of a diagnostic outcome.

8. The Sample Size for the Training Set

Not applicable. As this is a material, there is no "training set" in the context of machine learning. The device itself is manufactured, and its properties are measured.

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

Not applicable. There is no "training set" for this type of device.

Ask a specific question about this device

Asiga DentaBASE is intended exclusively for professional dental work.
Asiga DentaBASE is a 3D print resin intended for the manufacturing of 3D printed denture bases.
The denture bases produced are suitable for dental indications including removable dentures.

Asiga DentaBASE resins are used with digital light processing (DLP) based 3D printers to produce denture bases. DentaBASE resin has been validated for use with the Asiga Max Series and Pro Series 3D printers.

Asiga DentaBASE is a Type 4 light-cure methacrylate-based resin with photoinitiator, UV absorber, dispersant and pigments.

Asiga DentaBASE resin material is used in a DLP 3D printer, which prints the denture base from CAD data. The denture base is built by solidifying successive layers of photopolymer against each other. Each layer is light cured before adding the next layer, with post-curing in a light chamber unit. The 3D printer and light-curing unit are not included with the device.

The device is supplied as a pre-mixed resin in one color, natural pink. The device is supplied non-sterile, and it not intended to be sterilized.
Asiga DentaBASE has a shelf life of 36 months.
AsigaDentaBASE is compliant to ISO 20795-1 for Type 4 materials.
AsigaDentaBASE is a surface device with mucosal membrane contact for >30 days and is compliant to ISO 10993-1 and ISO 7405.

The provided FDA 510(k) clearance letter for Asiga DentaBASE does not contain information relevant to AI/ML device performance or clinical study details as described in the prompt's request. This is a clearance for a 3D printing resin for denture bases, which is a physical material, not an AI/ML diagnostic or assistive device.

Therefore, I cannot provide the requested information regarding:

• Acceptance criteria and reported device performance related to AI/ML metrics. The document refers to physical and chemical properties of the resin, not AI performance metrics like sensitivity, specificity, or AUC.
• Sample size and data provenance for a test set.
• Number and qualifications of experts for ground truth.
• Adjudication method.
• MRMC comparative effectiveness study.
• Standalone algorithm performance.
• Type of ground truth used (expert consensus, pathology, outcomes data, etc.).
• Sample size for the training set.
• How ground truth for the training set was established.

The document primarily focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence to a predicate device (NextDent Denture 3D+) and compliance with relevant ISO standards and FDA guidance for denture base resins (e.g., ISO 20795-1:2013 for Type 4 materials, ISO 10993-1:2018 for biocompatibility). The "tests" mentioned are bench tests for material properties (flexural strength, modulus, water sorption, solubility, residual monomer, biocompatibility), not performance evaluation of an AI algorithm.

The only "performance criteria" mentioned are those for the physical resin as outlined in FDA guidance "Denture Base Resins – Performance Criteria for Safety and Performance Based Pathway (April 13, 2022)" and ISO 20795-1:2013.

In summary, this document is about a material used in dentistry, not an AI product, so the requested AI-centric information is not present.

Ask a specific question about this device

Denture Base Resin is a light-curable polymerizable resin intended to be used for the fabrication of full and partial removable dentures. Fabrication of denture base Resin requires a digital denture file, 3D printer and post-curing unit.

Denture Base Resin is a liquid light-curable material. The product should be used in combination with the 3D printer. Printer and resin must be optimized to each other in order to get complete and precise printed parts. The 3D printer and the post-curing unit of SHINING3D make use of a light source to polymerize the Denture Base Resin.

I am sorry, but the provided text does not contain information about the acceptance criteria and study that proves the device meets the acceptance criteria in the format you requested, as it pertains to a medical device's AI/algorithm performance.

The document is a 510(k) premarket notification for a Denture Base Resin (a material used for making dentures). It focuses on:

• Substantial Equivalence: Comparing the new resin to an existing predicate resin based on material composition, intended use, manufacturing process, and various performance and biocompatibility tests for dental materials.
• Non-Clinical Performance Tests: These tests are for the physical and biological properties of the resin material itself, such as mechanical properties according to ISO 20795-1, color stability according to ISO 7491, biocompatibility according to ISO 10993-1 and ISO 7405, and shelf-life.
• No Clinical Study: The document explicitly states, "No clinical study is included in this submission."

Therefore, I cannot provide a table of acceptance criteria and reported device performance related to AI/algorithm, nor can I answer questions about sample sizes for test sets, data provenance, ground truth establishment by experts, adjudication methods, MRMC studies, or standalone algorithm performance, as these concepts are not addressed in the provided text which describes a physical dental material, not an AI medical device.

Ask a specific question about this device

Denture Base resin is a light-curable polymerizable resin intended to be used for the fabrication and repair of full and partial removable dentures and baseplates. The material is an alternative to traditional denture base material.

Fabrication of dental prosthetics with Denture Base resin requires computer-aided design and manufacturing system that includes the following components not part of the device: oral casting impression, digital denture base file created in an optical impression system, 3D printer, and curing light equipment.

The Denture Base consists of a curable dental acrylate resin that is designed to be used in conjunction with a scanned 3D image of a patient's teeth, and 3D printer assembly, to locally manufacture out a dental appliance in dental offices based on the clinician's judgment of patient need.

Denture Base resin is intended exclusively for professional dental work.

Denture Base is designed to meet appropriate ISO standards for flexibility, sorption, and solubility to withstand prolonged use in the oral cavity. It is delivered non-sterile, and instructions are provided on cleaning the material prior to providing it to a patient. Curing is performed with a UV lamp. The appliance is then cleaned, trimmed, and verified to fit in the dental office before the patient leaves.

I am sorry, but the provided text does not contain the information needed to answer your request. The document is an FDA 510(k) clearance letter and summary for a denture base resin, focusing on the substantial equivalence to a predicate device through biocompatibility and bench testing.

Specifically, the document does not describe acceptance criteria for a study, nor does it detail a study that proves a device meets such criteria in the way you've outlined for AI/software-based medical devices.

The document describes material testing for a physical product (denture resin), not the performance of an algorithm or AI model. Therefore, information such as sample sizes for test sets, data provenance, number of experts for ground truth, adjudication methods, MRMC studies, standalone performance, type of ground truth, training set size, and how training ground truth was established, are not present.

The "performance data" mentioned in the document refers to:

• Biocompatibility Testing: According to ISO 10993-1, covering tests like Cytotoxicity, Genotoxicity, Acute Systemic Toxicity, Subchronic toxicity, Irritation, and Sensitization.
• Bench Testing: According to ISO 20795-1, covering tests like Ultimate Flexural Strength and Modulus, Water Sorption and Solubility, Residual Methyl Methacrylate Monomers, Homogeneity, Surface Characteristics, Shape Capability, Translucency, Polishability, Colour, Freedom from Porosity, Color Stability, Maximum stress intensity factor, Total fracture work, and Bonding to synthetic polymer teeth.

These are tests of the physical properties and biological safety of the material, not algorithmic performance.

Ask a specific question about this device

· Lucitone Digital Print™ 3D Denture Base is a light-cured resin indicated for the fabrication of denture bases including full and partial dentures* and implant overdentures.
· Lucitone Digital IPN™ 3D Premium Tooth is a light-cured resin intended for printing denture teeth. Lucitone Digital Value™ 3D Economy Tooth & Trial Placement is intended for use as:
· Printing resin for fabricating removable dentures for try-in and evaluation prior to fabrication of the final denture.*
· Printing resin for fabricating a temporary denture.
· Printing resin for fabricating denture teeth in full arches and segments that will subsequently be fused into a denture base.
· Printing resin for fabricating provisional crowns, bridges.**
• Lucitone Digital Fuse™ Step 1 – 3D Tooth Conditioning Agent is indicated for use in enhancing the bond of denture teeth to denture base and denture base to denture base.
· Lucitone Digital Fuse™ Step 2 - 3D Denture Bonding Resin is utilized as an aid in bonding denture teeth to denture base as well as repair using traditional techniques.
· Lucitone Digital Fuse™ Step 3 – Total 3D Sealer is a light-cured sealant that produces a smooth, glossy surface finish on the denture.
*Partial and full dentures are replacement for patients with missing teeth.†
**For instructions on printing provisional crowns and bridges with Lucitone Digital Value reference Section G in IFU
+Statement added for EU MDR alignment.

Lucitone Digital Value™ (LDV) 3D Economy Tooth & Trial Placement, which is part of the Lucitone Digital Print™ Denture (LDPD) System, is a methacrylate-based resin system which is used to fabricate dental prostheses using an additive printer and computer aided design and computer aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) technologies.

I am sorry, but the provided text does not contain the detailed information necessary to answer your request about acceptance criteria and the study that proves the device meets them. The document is an FDA 510(k) summary for a dental device (Lucitone Digital Print Denture™ System) that describes the device, its indications for use, and a few performance tests.

Specifically, the following information is not present in the text:

• A comprehensive table of acceptance criteria and reported device performance. While some performance metrics are listed (Flexural Strength, Flexural Modulus, Water Sorption, Water Solubility), these are general and not presented as specific acceptance criteria with corresponding performance test results. For example, for "Flexural Strength," it only states "≥50 MPa" as the acceptance criterion, but it does not report the actual performance value obtained for the subject device.
• Sample size used for the test set and data provenance. The document only mentions "In all instances, the subject device functioned as intended and all test results observed were as expected," without providing details about the test set.
• Number of experts used to establish ground truth and their qualifications.
• Adjudication method.
• If a multi-reader multi-case (MRMC) comparative effectiveness study was done, or the effect size of human improvement with AI assistance. This device is a denture system, not an AI or diagnostic tool, so an MRMC study is highly unlikely to be relevant.
• If a standalone (algorithm only without human-in-the-loop performance) study was done. This is not applicable to a physical dental device.
• The type of ground truth used. This is not applicable in the context of a physical materials performance study.
• Sample size for the training set. This is not applicable as it's not an AI model.
• How the ground truth for the training set was established. This is not applicable as it's not an AI model.

The document mainly focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence to a predicate device through non-clinical performance data (material properties) and biocompatibility, rather than a clinical study evaluating diagnostic or treatment efficacy that would typically involve test sets, ground truth, and expert adjudication. The "Performance Data" section explicitly states, "Clinical and Pre-clinical testing were not necessary to demonstrate equivalence."

Ask a specific question about this device

Additively Manufactured Denture Resin is a light-cured resin indicated for the fabrication of all types of denture bases, for instance full and partial removable dentures.

Additively Manufactured Denture Resin is intended for continuous use in the oral environment, exclusively for professional dental work.

Additively Manufactured Denture Resin can be used in combination with a DLP 3D printers utilizing wavelengths at 385nm or 405nm. A 3D-printer is not part of the device.

Additively Manufactured Denture Resin is a light-cured one-component materials for dental professional use only and intended for the fabrication of full and partial removable dentures. This Product is a liquid photo-curable material that is polymerized, by the photo-initiator contained in the resin. For use in Digital Light Processing (DLP)-3D printers utilizing wavelengths at 385nm or 405nm. The specifications of this product are divided into 500g, 1000g, 5kg and 10kg according to the weight of the resin liquid.

The provided document is a 510(k) summary for a medical device called "Additively Manufactured Denture Resin." It presents information about the device's intended use, technological characteristics, and a comparison to a predicate device to establish substantial equivalence.

Based on the information provided, here's a breakdown of the acceptance criteria and study details:

Device: Additively Manufactured Denture Resin

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance:

The document refers to adherence to the international standard ISO 20795-1 Dentistry - Base polymers - Part 1: Denture base polymers for physical and mechanical properties. The specific acceptance criteria within this standard are not explicitly listed in a table, but the document states:

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

The document states "Bench Testing: Physical and mechanical properties of the subject device were evaluated according to FDA-recognized version ISO 20795-1 Dentistry - Base polymers - Part 1: Denture base polymers." It also mentions "Biocompatibility Testing was performed according to FDA currently-recognized versions of biocompatibility consensus standards..."

However, the specific sample sizes for these tests are not provided in the document. The data provenance is related to laboratory bench testing and biocompatibility testing, indicating a controlled laboratory environment rather than direct patient data. The origin of the testing (e.g., country) is not specified beyond the manufacturer being from China.

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

This information is not applicable in this context. The document describes the testing of a material's physical, mechanical, and biological properties against established international standards (ISO 20795-1, ISO 10993 series). Ground truth in this case is defined by these standards and the protocols for carrying out the tests, rather than by expert consensus on clinical cases.

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

This is not applicable. The testing involves objective measurements against predefined criteria in laboratory settings, not clinical interpretation requiring adjudication.

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:

This is not applicable. The device is a "Denture Resin," a material used for fabricating dental prostheses, not an AI or imaging diagnostic tool that would involve human readers or AI assistance.

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

This is not applicable. The device is a material, not a software algorithm.

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

The ground truth for the performance claims for the denture resin is based on established material science standards and biocompatibility guidelines (ISO 20795-1, ISO 10993, ISO 7405). These standards define the test methods and acceptance limits for various physical, mechanical, and biological properties.

8. The sample size for the training set:

This is not applicable. The device is a material product, not a machine learning model that requires a training set.

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

This is not applicable as there is no training set for this type of device.

Ask a specific question about this device

KeyPrint KeyDenture Base is a photopolymer resin indicated for the 3D fabrication of denture bases, including full and partial removable dentures, in dental laboratories. Fabrication requires a computer-aided design and manufacturing (CAD/CAM) system and 3D printer.

KeyPrint KeyDenture Base is designed for additive manufacturing in vat polymerization 3D printers utilizing wavelengths between 385nm-405nm. KeyDenture Base is indicated for the fabrication of oral denture appliances for fully and partially edentulous patients. KeyDenture Base is intended to be used within a computer-aided and manufacturing (CAD/CAM) digital dentistry system that includes a 3D scanner, design software, 3D printer, and post-cure unit. For any components that are used in conjunction with the KeyDenture Base resin, the user should review all applicable product labeling including Instructions for Use, user manuals, and other associated labeling. Strict adherence to all labeling is critical in assuring a safe and effective printed appliance.

The provided document is a 510(k) Summary for the KeyPrint KeyDenture Base. It details the device's characteristics and the non-clinical tests performed to demonstrate its substantial equivalence to predicate devices. There is no information about an AI/ML device in this document. Thus, I cannot fulfill the request as it relies on information about AI/ML device performance which is not present.

Ask a specific question about this device