Search Results
Found 3 results
510(k) Data Aggregation
(198 days)
NLL
The Reprocessed Reloadable AutoSuture GIA staplers are intended to be used in abdominal, gynecologic, pediatric and thoracic surgery for resection, transection of tissue and anastomosis. In addition the AutoSuture ENDO GIA Staplers may be used for transection of liver lissue, hepatic vasculature and biliary structures.
SterilMed's reprocessed AutoSuture GIA Endoscopic Stapler places two triple staggered rows of titanium staples and the blade, contained in the reload, simultaneously divides the tissue between the two rows. These devices allow for a maximum of 8 reloads in a single surgical procedure. The OEM has specified that the subject staplers may be fired up to 25 times in a single surgical procedure. SterilMed has lowered the number of firings allowed to 8 based upon clinical input, the procedures these devices are used for and the maximum allowable firings for similar devices of other manufactures. Note: Only the stapler is the subject of this submission, the implantable staple and the staple cartridge are not reprocessed and therefore are not included.
The provided document describes a 510(k) premarket notification for Reprocessed AutoSuture GIA Endoscopic Staplers. This is a submission for a reprocessed medical device, not a novel AI/software-as-a-medical-device (SaMD) product. Therefore, the information requested in the prompt, such as AI model performance, sample sizes for training/test sets, expert adjudication, MRMC studies, and ground truth establishment, is not applicable to this type of submission.
The acceptance criteria and supporting study for a reprocessed device primarily focus on demonstrating that the reprocessed device performs substantially equivalently to the original (predicate) device and that the reprocessing methods (cleaning, sterilization, functional testing) are validated and effective.
Here's an interpretation based on the provided document:
Acceptance Criteria and Device Performance for Reprocessed AutoSuture GIA Endoscopic Staplers
| Acceptance Criteria Category | Description | Reported Device Performance |
|---|---|---|
| Functional Characteristics | The reprocessed staplers must demonstrate appropriate functional characteristics, performing in a manner substantially equivalent to the original, new AutoSuture GIA Endoscopic Stapler. This includes: | Representative samples of reprocessed staplers are confirmed to meet the functional performance of the predicate device (AutoSuture GIA Endoscopic Stapler K061095). Specific metrics are not detailed but would typically include: |
| Cleaning Validation | The reprocessing methods must effectively clean the used devices to remove biological contaminants and particulates. | Process validation testing was performed to validate the cleaning procedures. The specific metrics for cleanliness (e.g., residual protein, hemoglobin, TOC) and the acceptance limits would have been established and met during this validation. |
| Sterilization Validation | The reprocessing methods must effectively sterilize the cleaned devices, rendering them free of viable microorganisms. | Process validation testing was performed to validate the sterilization procedures. This typically involves demonstrating a sterility assurance level (SAL) of 10^-6 or better for a terminal sterilization process, using biological indicators and validated cycles. |
| Packaging Validation | The packaging used for the reprocessed devices must maintain sterility and product integrity until the point of use. | Process validation testing was performed to validate device packaging. This typically involves accelerated and real-time aging studies, as well as package integrity tests (e.g., peel strength, burst tests). |
| Manufacturing Process Control | The manufacturing process for reprocessing must include robust controls to ensure consistent quality and performance of all produced devices. | The manufacturing process includes visual and validated functional testing of all products produced. This implies a quality management system with in-process and final product inspections and tests to ensure conformity to specifications. |
| Maximum Firings Allowed | The reprocessed device must be safe for use for a specified maximum number of firings within a single surgical procedure. The OEM allows up to 25 firings for new devices. SterilMed aimed to lower this number based on clinical input and comparison with similar devices, demonstrating safety for the proposed use. | SterilMed lowered the number of firings allowed to 8 based on clinical input, procedures used, and maximum allowable firings for similar devices of other manufacturers. This implies testing was conducted to support the safety and efficacy of the device for at least 8 firings after reprocessing. |
| Material Equivalence | The reprocessed device, post-reprocessing, must maintain material properties that are substantially equivalent to the predicate device and suitable for its intended use. (Not explicitly stated as an "acceptance criteria" but implied by substantial equivalence claim). | The conclusion of substantial equivalence is based on the devices' similarities in functional design (principle of operation), materials, indications for use, and methods of construction. This suggests that materials are not significantly degraded or altered by the reprocessing such that they compromise safety or performance. |
| Indications for Use | The reprocessed device must be suitable for the same indications for use as the predicate device. | The reprocessed reloadable AutoSuture GIA staplers are intended for use in abdominal, gynecologic, pediatric, and thoracic surgery for resection, transection of tissue and anastomosis. Additionally, the AutoSuture ENDO GIA Staplers may be used for transection of liver tissue, hepatic vasculature, and biliary structures, which aligns with the typical indications for the new predicate device. |
Regarding the AI/SaMD specific questions from the prompt:
- Sample size used for the test set and the data provenance (e.g. country of origin of the data, retrospective or prospective): Not applicable, this is a reprocessed physical device. Testing would involve a sample of reprocessed devices from the production line, not a data test set.
- Number of experts used to establish the ground truth for the test set and the qualifications of those experts (e.g. radiologist with 10 years of experience): Not applicable. Clinical input informed the "8 firings" decision, but this isn't ground truth for an algorithm.
- Adjudication method (e.g. 2+1, 3+1, none) for the test set: Not applicable.
- 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.
- If a standalone (i.e. algorithm only without human-in-the-loop performance) was done: Not applicable.
- The type of ground truth used (expert consensus, pathology, outcomes data, etc): For a reprocessed device, "ground truth" would relate to objective measurements of functionality, safety (e.g., sterility, cleanliness, burst strength for staple lines), and material integrity compared to the new device specifications and regulatory standards. It doesn't involve clinical "ground truth" in the diagnostic sense.
- The sample size for the training set: Not applicable.
- How the ground truth for the training set was established: Not applicable.
In summary, this 510(k) submission demonstrates substantial equivalence for a reprocessed stapler through bench testing and process validation for cleaning, sterilization, packaging, and functional performance, rather than clinical studies or AI algorithm validation.
Ask a specific question about this device
(168 days)
NLL
The ETS 45, ETS-Flex45, and Compact-Flex 45 reprocessed, reloadable Endoscopic Linear Cutters are intended for transection, resection and/or anastomosis. These instruments have applications in open and minimally invasive general, gynecologic, urologic (including radical prostatectomy), thoracic and pediatric surgery. The ETS Flex 45, ETS 45 and ETS Compact Flex 45 device can be used with staple line or tissue buttressing materials such as bovine pericardium.
The ETS and ETS-Flex (articulating) reprocessed, reloadable Endoscopic Linear Cutters (35mm) have applications in general, gynecologic, urologic, and thoracic surgery for transection, and/or creation of anastomoses.
SterilMed's reprocessed Ethicon ETS Linear Cutter is a sterile, single patient use device. It delivers two double-staggered or two triple-staggered rows of staples while simultaneously dividing the tissue between the rows of staples. An articulation lever on the ETS-Flex Linear Cutter enables bilateral movement of the instrument jaws. These devices are reloadable linear cutters that allow for a maximum of 8 firings in a single surgical procedure.
Note: Only the linear cutter is the subject of this submission, the implantable staple and the staple cartridge are not reprocessed and therefore are not included.
The provided text does not contain detailed acceptance criteria for a device, nor does it describe a specific study that proves the device meets such criteria. Instead, the document is a 510(k) summary for the reprocessing of Ethicon ETS Endoscopic Linear Cutters, demonstrating substantial equivalence to predicate devices. It outlines the device description, intended use, and general functional and safety testing, but lacks the specific performance metrics and study details requested.
Therefore, I cannot provide the requested information in the structured table and numbered points. The document states:
"Representative samples of reprocessed Linear Cutters are tested to demonstrate appropriate functional characteristics. Process validation testing is performed to validate the cleaning and sterilization procedures as well as device packaging. In addition, the manufacturing process includes visual and validated functional testing of all products produced."
This indicates that testing was performed, but the specifics of acceptance criteria and the results of a study designed to prove these criteria are met are not included in the provided text.
Ask a specific question about this device
(606 days)
NLL
Reloadable Cutters
The ClearMedical Reprocessed Reloadable Cutters are intended for transection, resection, and creation of anastomoses in gastrointestinal, gynecologic, thoracic, and pediatric surgery.
Reloadable Staplers
The ClearMedical Reprocessed Reloadable Staplers are intended for the resection of tissues in the alimentary tract and in thoracic surgery.
The Reprocessed Reloadable Cutters deliver two double-staggered rows of titanium staples while dividing the tissue between the rows. The reloadable cutters may be reloaded during a single procedure, up to a maximum number of firings per instrument as stated in the product insert.
The Reprocessed Reloadable Staplers deliver two double-staggered rows of titanium staples to approximate internal tissues. The reloadable cutters may be reloaded during a single procedure, up to a maximum number of firings per instrument as stated in the product insert.
The provided text is a 510(k) Summary for a medical device called "ClearMedical Reprocessed Reloadable Linear Cutters and Staplers" (K033579) and a subsequent FDA clearance letter for a related product with similar name (K033578). The documents essentially state that the reprocessed devices are substantially equivalent to their predicate devices. However, the text does NOT contain information about specific acceptance criteria or a detailed study proving the device meets those criteria.
The 510(k) Summary states: "Validation of cleaning, performance, packaging, and sterilization together with biocompatibility testing demonstrate reprocessed clip reloadable cutters and staplers perform as intended and are safe and effective." This is a high-level statement and does not provide the specifics requested in your prompt.
Therefore, I cannot fill out the requested table and answer the study-related questions based on the provided input because the required detailed information is not present. The document focuses on establishing substantial equivalence based on the technological characteristics being unchanged and relying on general validation of various aspects rather than a specific comparative performance study with defined acceptance criteria and statistical analysis.
If this information were present, it would typically be found in dedicated sections detailing performance testing methodologies, results, and statistical analyses, which are absent here.
Ask a specific question about this device
Page 1 of 1