Search Results

Ask a specific question about this device

Yomi Robotic System is a computerized robotic navigational system intended to provide assistance in both the planning (pre-operative) and the surgical (intra-operative) phases of dental implantation surgery. The system provides software to preoperatively plan dental implantation procedures and provides robotional guidance of the surgical instruments. The system can also be used for planning and performing guided bone reduction (also known as alveoplasty) of the mandible and/or maxilla. Yomi Robotic System is intended for use in partially edentulous adult patients who qualify for dental implants.

When YomiPlan software is used for preplanning on third party PCs, it is intended to perform the planning (pre-operative) phase of dental implantation surgery. YomiPlan provides pre-operative planning for dental implantation procedures using the Yomi Robotic System. The output of YomiPlan is to be used with the Yomi Robotic System.

Yomi Robotic System is a dental stereotaxic instrument and a powered surgical device for bone cutting. Yomi Robotic System is a computerized navigational system intended to provide assistance in both the planning (pre-operative) and the surgical (intra-operative) phases of dental implantation surgery. The system provides software to preoperatively plan dental implantation procedures and provides navigational guidance of the surgical instruments. The Yomi Robotic System is intended for use in partially edentulous and fully edentulous adult patients who qualify for dental implants.

The Yomi Robotic System allows the user to plan the surgery virtually in YomiPlan, cleared for use alone on third-party PCs for preplanning. The operative plan is based on a cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) scan of the patient, which is used to create a 3-D model of the patient anatomy in the planning software. The plan is used for the system to provide physical, visual, and audible feedback to the surgeon during the implant site preparation. The Yomi robotic arm holds and guides a standard FDA-cleared third party powered bone cutting instrument.

The patient tracking portion of Yomi is comprised of linkages from the patient to Yomi, which include the Patient Splint (YomiLink Teeth or YomiLink Bone), Tracker End Effector (TEE), and the Patient Tracker (PT). In cases where YomiLink Teeth is utilized, it is attached to the contralateral side of the patient's mouth over stable teeth using on-label dental materials prior to the presurgical CBCT scan. In cases where YomiLink Bone is utilized, it is placed using bone screws prior to the presurgical CBCT scan (appropriate local anesthesia is required), or after the scan when using the subject YomiLink Arch device.

The subject of this submission is to introduce new accessories, the YomiLink Arch and Probing Bit. The YomiLink Arch allows for CBCT scan acquisition prior to YomiLink Bone placement and enables guided YomiLink Bone placement. This submission also introduces an update to the system planning software to enable use of the YomiLink Arch (YLA).

Following attachment of YomiLink Bone (YLB) to the patient, probing of the YLA is performed utilizing the YLA Probing Bit to transfer registration in the software from YLA to YLB and allow for tracking of the YLB throughout the remaining surgical procedure. The YLA Probing Bit is available in straight and contra-angle configurations corresponding to the handpiece to which they are attached.

All other aspects of the Yomi Robotic System remain unchanged from prior clearances.

This document describes the regulatory approval of the Neocis Yomi Robotic System with new accessories (YomiLink Arch and Probing Bit), indicating substantial equivalence to a previously cleared device. However, it does not provide explicit acceptance criteria in terms of specific performance metrics (e.g., sensitivity, specificity, accuracy thresholds) for an AI device. Instead, it refers to performance testing conducted to ensure the device functions as intended.

Based on the provided text, here's an attempt to structure the information, acknowledging the limitations for a full AI acceptance criteria description:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

As the document is a 510(k) summary for a robotic surgical system, not a purely AI diagnostic or prognostic device, the "acceptance criteria" are described in terms of verification and validation testing to ensure the added accessories and workflow maintain the system's intended function and safety. Specific numerical performance metrics for AI algorithms (like sensitivity or specificity) are not provided in this regulatory summary.

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

The document does not specify the sample size for individual tests, nor does it provide details on the data provenance (e.g., country of origin, retrospective/prospective). The performance testing described appears to be a series of engineering and usability validations rather than a clinical study with a patient-derived test set in the conventional sense of AI performance evaluation. The "test sets" would likely refer to engineering models, simulated environments, and potentially cadaveric or phantom models for accuracy and repeatability testing.

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

This information is not provided in the document. For a robotic system, "ground truth" often involves highly precise measurement equipment and established engineering benchmarks rather than expert clinical consensus for image interpretation. For human factors validation, usability experts and clinicians would be involved, but specific numbers and qualifications are not listed here.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set

This information is not provided.

5. If a Multi Reader Multi Case (MRMC) Comparative Effectiveness Study was Done

No MRMC study is mentioned. This type of study is typically performed for AI systems that assist human readers in diagnostic or screening tasks. The Yomi Robotic System is a surgical guidance system, and the "AI" component is more embedded in its navigation and planning software, not as a separate diagnostic reader.

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

The performance testing revolves around the integrated system, including the software and new accessories (YomiLink Arch and Probing Bit) as they interact within the existing Yomi Robotic System workflow. While core algorithm accuracy is verified, it's presented within the context of the overall system's function, not as a standalone AI diagnostic output. The YomiPlan software is for preplanning, and its output is to be used with the Yomi Robotic System, not as a standalone diagnostic.

7. The Type of Ground Truth Used

The ground truth for the device's accuracy and performance would be established through a combination of methods typical for robotic systems:

• Physical measurements: Using highly accurate metrology equipment to verify positioning, deflection, and repeatability against known physical standards.
• Engineering specifications: Comparing system performance against pre-defined engineering tolerances and design requirements.
• Simulation/Phantoms: Testing the system's ability to accurately navigate and execute plans on controlled phantom models.
• User requirements: For human factors and software end-user validation, the "ground truth" would be the successful completion of tasks by users in accordance with specified requirements and industry standards for usability.

Specific details about the type of ground truth for each test are not elaborated in this summary.

8. The Sample Size for the Training Set

The document does not mention the sample size for the training set. For a robotic navigational system like Yomi, "training" might refer to the development and refinement of algorithms for spatial recognition, registration, and robotic control. This process typically involves extensive internal validation and iterative development with various datasets (e.g., 3D models, CBCT scans) but does not necessarily align with the concept of a "training set" in the context of supervised machine learning for diagnostic tasks.

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

This information is not provided. Similar to point 7, the "ground truth" for developing such a system would be based on engineering principles, known anatomical landmarks, and precise spatial measurements to ensure accurate digital representations and their correlation with physical reality for robotic guidance.

Ask a specific question about this device

Navident is a computerized dental navigational system intended to assist preoperative planning and to guide drilling in a patient jaw during implantation surgery, using pre-acquired CT scan of the jaw. The device is intended for use by a qualified dental surgeon in the treatment of partially or fully edentulous jaws.

Navident is an image-guided dental navigational system intended to assist with preoperative planning and real-time positioning of drilling tools during implantation surgery. In particular, Navident provides visual, real-time feedback on the location of the working tip of a dental handpiece. It shows the location and direction of the tip relative to a volumetric CT image of the patient's jaw registered to that anatomy, and, when available, relative to a path planned on that image. Navident is comprised of the following parts: The main system is comprised of a cart that carries a stereoscopic video camera and a laptop with pre-installed proprietary software. The Navident system also includes several types of accessories: Jaw motion Tracking Accessories, Dental Handpiece Tracking Accessories, Registration accessories, Calibrator. Navident's four core functions are: Model, Plan, Register, Guide.

Here's an analysis of the provided text to extract information about the acceptance criteria and the study proving the device meets them:

Device: Navident

Product Code: PLV
Regulation Number: 21 CFR 872.4120
Regulation Name: Bone Cutting Instrument And Accessories
Regulatory Class: Class II

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

The provided text focuses on the performance data of the device rather than explicit "acceptance criteria" presented as pass/fail thresholds against specific metrics, except for the accuracy at the drill tip. Instead, it describes various validation and testing activities that collectively demonstrate the device's acceptable performance.

Ask a specific question about this device

Yomi is a computerized robotic navigational system intended to provide assistance in both the planning (pre-operative) and the surgical (intra-operative) phases of dental implantation surgery. The system provides software to preoperatively plan dental implantation procedures and provides robotic navigational guidance of the surgical instruments. Yomi is intended for use in partially edentulous adult patients who qualify for dental implants.

When YomiPlan software is used for preplanning on third party PCs, it is intended to perform the planning (pre-operative) phase of dental implantation surgery. Yomi Plan provides pre-operative planning for dental implantation procedures using the Yomi Robotic System. The output of Yomi Plan is to be used with the Yomi Robotic System.

The subject of this submission is YomiPlan Go, a feature of the Yomi Robotic System which enables the use of the system without the uploading of a preoperative CT scan. The dynamic planning feature in K202264 requires a pre-operative CT scan for use. This submission includes a new workflow called YomiPlan Go and provides instructions on how to use this feature without the need of uploading a CT scan to the Yomi system. This planning involves placing the robotic arm drill tip to the point where an osteotomy is to be performed i.e., the surgeon performs planning with their direct visualization of the anatomy and with the use of the robotic arm to select where the osteotomy is to be performed. YomiPlan Go gives surgeons the ability to perform an osteotomy under robotic guidance at the point that the surgeon selects on the patient's anatomy. The selected point, axis, and trajectory are maintained by the robotic arm while the surgeon performs the osteotomy.

Here's an analysis of the acceptance criteria and the study proving the device meets them, based on the provided text:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance:

Ask a specific question about this device

The INLIANT Surgical Navigation System (INLIANT) is a computerized navigational system intended to provide assistance in both pre-operative planning and the intra-operative surgical phase of dental implantation procedures. INLIANT provides software to pre-operatively plan dental implantation procedures and provides navigational guidance of surgical instruments.

INLIANT is intended for use for partially edentulous adult patients who require dental implants as part of their treatment plan.

INLIANT is a dynamic surgical navigation system designed to allow a clinician to plan a dental procedure and then provide accurate guidance in real-time as to the location of dental surgical tool's drill tip relative to the patient's anatomy and plant position during the dental surgical procedure.

INLIANT includes a stand-alone cart which provides mobility and structural support for the computer, monitor and the camera which consists of two high resolution optical image sensors and lens assemblies. The system also includes the handpiece (model WI-75 LED G cleared under K080939), Patient Trackers and Fiducial Kit.

Operation of INLIANT is based on optical tracking. Stereoscopic images of the markers on the Patient Tracker and a handpiece are captured by the camera above the surgical site. INLIANT software processes the captured images to determine the location and orientation of the hand piece with respect to the Patient Tracker which is rigidly attached to the patient. The position of the handpiece, drill and the planned implant position is overlaid on existing CBCT scans of the patient's jaw and displayed to the clinician.

The submitted document describes the K213392 510(k) summary for the INLIANT® Surgical Navigation System. This device is a computerized navigational system intended for dental implantation procedures, assisting in pre-operative planning and intra-operative guidance. The primary purpose of the validation study was to demonstrate substantial equivalence to a predicate device (K150222, X-Guide Surgical Navigation System) in terms of accuracy.

Here's an analysis of the acceptance criteria and the study that proves the device meets them:

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

The document provides a comparison table (page 5-6) outlining performance characteristics. The critical performance characteristic for this device is its accuracy at the drill tip.

Note: The document explicitly states that the INLIANT system performed identically to the predicate device in terms of "Accuracy at the Drill Tip" and "Presentation Update Rate." The clinical study (described below) then aimed to confirm that the angular non-inferiority was met compared to the predicate's performance against freehand.

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

• Sample Size: A total of 23 implants were placed among 22 adult subjects in the clinical performance study.
• Data Provenance: The study was a single-clinic, confirmatory, non-randomized study. The subjects were dental clinic patients. The document does not explicitly state the country of origin, but given the FDA submission, it's typically assumed to be within the US or a region with comparable regulatory standards. The study appears to be prospective as it involved placing implants and following patients post-surgery.

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

The document does not specify the number of experts used to establish the ground truth or their qualifications for the clinical performance study. It states that "Four investigators used INLIANT to place the dental implants." These investigators are presumably qualified dental professionals, but their specific qualifications (e.g., years of experience, specialization) are not detailed.

4. Adjudication method for the test set

The document does not describe an explicit adjudication method for the test set, such as 2+1 or 3+1 consensus. The ground truth (deviations between planned and placed implant positions) was established by "registering pre-operative and post-operative CBCT scans in a common reference," suggesting an objective measurement process rather than a subjective expert 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

The study was a clinical performance study of the device (INLIANT), not a multi-reader, multi-case study comparing human readers with and without AI assistance. The study's objective was to confirm the device's accuracy and non-inferiority to the predicate device by measuring implant deviations, rather than assessing human reader performance improvement. The "AI" component here is the navigational system assisting a human operator, not a diagnostic AI analyzing images by itself or providing a read.

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

This device is a surgical navigation system, inherently designed for human-in-the-loop use. It provides real-time guidance to a clinician during a procedure. Therefore, a standalone (algorithm only) performance assessment would not be relevant or feasible for this type of device. The accuracy assessment (≤1.0mm drilling accuracy) is a system-level performance metric that includes the device's software and hardware in operation.

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

The ground truth for the clinical performance study was primarily objective measurements based on imaging data. Specifically, "lateral (coronal and apical) and angular deviations between the pre-planned implant positions and actual implant positions were measured by registering pre-operative and post-operative CBCT scans in a common reference." This method uses the physically placed implant's position as "ground truth" compared to the pre-planned position.

8. The sample size for the training set

The document does not provide a sample size for a "training set." This device is a surgical navigation system, not a machine learning model that typically undergoes a distinct training phase with a labeled dataset in the same way an image classification AI would. It's an engineered system with algorithms for real-time tracking and guidance. Its development would involve engineering design, calibration, and verification, rather than "training" on a large dataset of patient cases to learn to perform a task.

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

As there is no "training set" in the context of a machine learning model, the concept of establishing ground truth for it does not apply in this document. The device's performance is validated through non-clinical bench testing (e.g., performance testing to evaluate tolerance analysis, latency, positional and tracking accuracy per ASTM F2554) and the clinical study described. The ground truth for these non-clinical tests would involve highly controlled experimental setups with known reference points and precise measurement instruments.

Ask a specific question about this device

The Neocis Guidance System (NGS) is a computerized navigational system intended to provide assistance in both the planning (pre-operative) and the surgical (intra-operative) phases of dental implantation surgery. The system provides software to preoperatively plan dental implantation procedures and provides navigational guidance of the surgical instruments. The NGS is intended for use in partially edentulous adult patients who qualify for dental implants.

When Yomi Plan software is used for preplanning on third party PCs, it is intended to perform the planning (pre-operative) phase of dental implantation surgery. Yomi Plan provides pre-operative planning for dental implantation procedures. The output of Yomi Plan is to be used with the Neocis Guidance System (NGS).

The purpose of subject device is for modification of the Neocis Guidance System (K202264) to allow for Wi-Fi to be continuously active in the Yomi Plan v2.0.1 while it is powered on. All other software and hardware features/functions remain identical to the predicate. In terms of FDA regulations, the Neocis Guidance System (NGS) is a dental stereotaxic instrument (Product Code PLV) and a powered surgical device for bone cutting (21 CFR 872.4120).

The Neocis Guidance System (NGS) is a computerized navigational system intended to provide assistance in both the planning (pre-operative) and the surgical (intra-operative) phases of dental implantation surgery. The system provides software to preoperatively plan dental implantation procedures and provides navigational guidance of the surgical instruments. The NGS is intended for use in partially edentulous and fully edentulous adult patients who qualify for dental implants.

Major components include: Monitor, Planning Station Laptop PC, Lift Column, Base Cart, Robotic Guide Arm, and Patient Tracker.

The system allows the user to plan the surgery virtually in Yomi Plan (K191363-cleared for use alone on third party PCs for preplanning). The operative plan is based on a cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) scan of the patient, which is used to create a 3-D model of the patient anatomy in our planning software. The plan is used by a guidance system to provide physical, visual, and audible feedback to the surgeon during the implant site preparation. The NGS robotic arm holds and guides a standard FDAcleared third party powered bone cutting instrument (K191605).

The patient tracking portion of the NGS is comprised of linkages from the patient to the NGS, which include the Chairside Patient Splint (CPS) (K173402) or Edentulous Patient Splint (EPS) (K200805), the End Effector (EE) and the Patient Tracker (PT).

The request is to describe the acceptance criteria and the study that proves the device meets the acceptance criteria for the Neocis Guidance System (NGS) with Yomi Plan v2.0.1.

Based on the provided text, the submission does not contain a study proving that the device meets specific performance acceptance criteria for its clinical function. Instead, it modifies an existing, previously cleared device (NGS with Yomi Plan v2.0) to allow continuous Wi-Fi activity and describes the testing conducted to ensure this modification maintains safety and effectiveness, primarily through software verification, wireless coexistence testing, and EMC testing.

Therefore, the following information is extracted and presented in relation to the modification and associated testing, rather than a clinical performance study with acceptance criteria for the device's primary function of dental implantation guidance.

Acceptance Criteria and Study Proving Device Meets Criteria

The Neocis Guidance System (NGS) with Yomi Plan v2.0.1 is a modification of a previously cleared device (Neocis Guidance System (NGS) with Yomi Plan v2.0, K202264). The primary change in this submission is to allow Wi-Fi to be continuously active in the Yomi Plan v2.0.1 while it is powered on. Therefore, the "acceptance criteria" and "study" described below relate to the safety and effectiveness of this change and the overall system's compliance with relevant standards.

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

• ANSI AAMI ISO 14971: 2019 (Risk Management)
• ANSI AAMI IEC 62304:2006/A1:2016 (Software Life Cycle Processes)
• FDA Guidance for Content of Premarket Submissions for Software Contained in Medical Devices (May 11, 2005)
• FDA Guidance for Cybersecurity in Medical Devices (Oct 2, 2014; Dec 28, 2016)
• Cybersecurity for Networked Medical Devices (Jan 14, 2005)
• AAMI TIR57: 2016 (Medical Device Security) |
  | Wireless Coexistence | Safe and effective operation with continuous Wi-Fi in the presence of other radio-frequency devices. | Tested according to:
• AAMI TIR69: 2017 (Risk management of radio-frequency wireless coexistence for medical devices and systems)
• IEEE ANSI C63.27-2017 (American National Standard for Evaluation of Wireless Coexistence) |
  | Electromagnetic Compatibility (EMC) | Compliance with EMC standards for medical electrical equipment. | Tested according to:
• IEC 60601-1-2 Edition 4.1 2020-09 (Medical electrical equipment - Part 1-2: General requirements for basic safety and essential performance - Collateral Standard: Electromagnetic disturbances - Requirements and tests) |
  | Clinical Performance (Primary Function) | Not explicitly detailed in this 510(k) summary for the subject device. This submission is for a modification to a previously cleared device, assuming its fundamental clinical performance is already established. | "Our performance testing demonstrates substantially equivalent performance of the subject device as compared to the predicate." (This statement refers to equivalence, not necessarily a new clinical performance study for the modified device). |

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

The provided text does not specify sample sizes for test sets related to clinical performance. The testing described relates to technical compliance (software, wireless, EMC).

• Data Provenance: Not applicable in the context of clinical data for this specific 510(k) submission, as it doesn't describe a clinical study for performance. The testing pertains to engineering and regulatory standards for the device modification.

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

• Not applicable. This submission focuses on engineering testing (software, wireless, EMC) rather than a clinical study requiring expert-established ground truth for device performance validation in a patient setting.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set

• Not applicable. This submission focuses on engineering testing, not a study requiring adjudication of clinical outcomes or 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

• No, an MRMC comparative effectiveness study was not done as described in the provided text. The device is a computerized navigational system for dental implantation, not an AI-assisted diagnostic or interpretation tool for human readers. This submission focuses on a software modification (continuous Wi-Fi) and its impact on technical safety and performance.

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

• Not explicitly detailed. The described testing pertains to the integrated system's technical compliance and software behavior (Yomi Plan v2.0.1) in the context of continuous Wi-Fi. While individual software components would undergo standalone verification, the submission does not describe a standalone clinical performance study. The device is described as providing "navigational guidance of the surgical instruments" and "haptic feedback to the surgeon by constraining the motion of the bone cutting instrument to the plan," implying human-in-the-loop operation.

7. The Type of Ground Truth Used (expert consensus, pathology, outcomes data, etc.)

• Not applicable. For the technical testing (software verification, wireless coexistence, EMC), the "ground truth" is adherence to established engineering standards, cybersecurity protocols, and functional specifications, rather than clinical ground truth (e.g., pathology, expert consensus on images).

8. The Sample Size for the Training Set

• Not applicable. The submission does not describe a machine learning or AI model that requires a training set. The software is a planning and guidance system not explicitly described as employing AI in a way that requires a training set for model development.

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

• Not applicable. As no training set is described for an AI/ML model.

Ask a specific question about this device

The Neocis Guidance System (NGS) is a computerized navigational system intended to provide assistance in both the planning (pre-operative) and the surgical (intra-operative) phases of dental implantation surgery. The system provides software to preoperatively plan dental implantation procedures and provides navigational guidance of the surgical instruments.

In terms of FDA regulations, the Neocis Guidance System (NGS) is a dental stereotaxic instrument (Product Code PLV) and a powered surgical device for bone cutting (21 CFR 872.4120). The NGS is a computerized navigational system intended to provide assistance in both the planning (pre-operative) and the surgical (intra-operative) phases of dental implantation surgery. The system provides software to preoperatively plan dental implantation procedures and provides navigational guidance of the surgical instruments. The NGS is intended for use in partially edentulous and fully edentulous adult patients who qualify for dental implants. The system allows the user to plan the surgery virtually in Yomi Plan. The operative plan is based on a cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) scan of the patient, which is used to create a 3-D model of the patient anatomy in our planning software. The plan is used by a guidance system to provide physical, visual, and audible feedback to the surgeon during the implant site preparation. The NGS robotic arm holds and guides a standard FDA-cleared third party powered bone cutting instrument. The patient tracking portion of the NGS is comprised of linkages from the patient to the NGS, which include the Chairside Patient Splint (CPS) or Edentulous Patient Splint (EPS), the End Effector (EE) and the Patient Tracker (PT). A Fiducial Array (FA) with radio-opaque fiducial markers is placed on the CPS prior to the CBCT scan so the virtual plan can be related to the physical space of the system using the markers. The PT is an electromechanical feedback system that is connected to the CPS on the patient, which relays information to the NGS in order to track patient movement. The subject of this submission is adding Intraoral Fiducial Array (IOFA) as a new device accessory based on a previously cleared design. The IOFA is intended for use in clinical sites with reduced scan volumes. The IOFA is designed to reside with all the fiducial beads within the patient's mouth. The IOFA can only be used with the C-CPS.

Here's a summary of the acceptance criteria and study information for the Neocis Guidance System (NGS) with Intraoral Fiducial Array (IOFA), based on the provided text:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance:

Ask a specific question about this device

The Neocis Guidance System (NGS) is a computerized navigational system intended to provide assistance in both the planning (pre-operative) and the surgical (intra-operative) phases of dental implantation surgery. The system provides software to preoperatively plan dental implantation procedures and provides navigational guidance of the surgical instruments. The NGS is intended for use in partially edentulous and fully edentulous adult patients who qualify for dental implants.

The Neocis Guidance System (NGS) (K161399) is a dental stereotaxic instrument (Product Code PLV) and a powered surgical device for bone cutting (21 CFR 872.4120). The Neocis Guidance System (NGS) is a computerized navigational system intended to provide assistance in both the planning (pre-operative) and the surgical (intra-operative) phases of dental implantation surgery. The system provides precise and accurate navigational guidance of surgical instruments, with regard to planning in dental implantation procedures. The system allows the user to plan the surgery virtually in software using a cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) scan of the patient, and the plan is used by a guidance system to provide physical, visual, and audible feedback to the surgeon during the implant site preparation. The holds and guides a standard FDA-cleared powered bone cutting instrument.

The implant process occurs in two phases. First, the dental surgeon plans the surgical procedure with the planning software. A virtual implant is placed at the desired location in the CT scan, allowing the dental surgeon to avoid interfering with critical anatomical structures during implant surgery. Second, when the implant plan is optimally positioned, the NGS provides accurate guidance of the dental surgical instruments according to the pre-operative plan. The NGS provides haptic feedback to the surgeon by constraining the motion of the bone cutting instrument to the plan. This allows the surgeon to feel resistance to attempts at motions that may deviate from the plan.

The patient tracking portion of the NGS is comprised of linkages from the NGS, which for partially edentulous patients include the Chairside Patient Splint (CPS) (K173402) or the Clamped Chairside Patient Splint (CCPS) (K202100), the End Effector (EE) and the Patient Tracker (PT). The CPS or CCPS is attached to the contralateral side of the patient's mouth over stable teeth. The CPS is placed on the patient using on-label dental materials (K182776) prior to the presurgical CBCT scan. A Fiducial Array (FA) with radio-opaque fiducial markers is placed on the splint prior to the CBCT scan so the virtual plan can be related to the physical space of the system using the markers. The PT is an electromechanical feedback system that is connected to the splint on the patient, which relays information to the control software in order to track patient movement. If patient movement occurs during the surgical procedure, the system will respond by altering the prescribed surgical cutting angle, position, and depth to accommodate the patient movement, which will maintain the accuracy of the osteotomy.

The subject of this submission is a design change to the sleeves in our Edentulous Patient Splint (EPS) (K200805). The EPS enables use of the NGS in fully edentulous patients. It is affixed to the anterior mandible or maxilla using standard bone screws. Like the CPS and CCPS, the EPS serves as rigid connection to the patient for robotic tracking of the patient during the procedure. The EPS is intended for use in partially edentulous and fully edentulous adult patients who qualify for dental implants.

The provided text discusses the Neocis Guidance System (NGS) with Edentulous Patient Splint (EPS) and a design change to its sleeves. However, it does not contain a detailed study proving the device meets acceptance criteria for performance, especially not in the context of diagnostic accuracy (e.g., sensitivity, specificity, AUC).

Instead, the document focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence to a predicate device (Neocis Guidance System (NGS) with Patient Splints, K200805) after a design change to the EPS sleeves. The "Performance Testing" section lists various tests conducted, primarily related to the physical and biological aspects of the device, rather than a clinical performance study.

Therefore, many of the requested elements (like sample size for test/training sets, data provenance, number of experts for ground truth, adjudication method, MRMC studies, standalone performance, type of ground truth for training) are not available in the provided text for a clinical performance study.

Here's what can be extracted and inferred from the text, focusing on the design change and the tests mentioned:

Acceptance Criteria and Device Performance (Design Change Validation)

The document describes a design change to the sleeves within the Edentulous Patient Splint (EPS) component of the Neocis Guidance System (NGS). The acceptance criteria are implicitly related to ensuring this design change does not negatively impact the safety and effectiveness of the device, and that it remains substantially equivalent to the predicate.

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance:

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

• Sample Size: Not explicitly stated for performance tests like "EPS Weighted Deflection Test" or "Total System Accuracy". These are typically engineering verification tests, and the "sample size" would refer to the number of units tested.
• Data Provenance: Not specified for these engineering tests. "Sawbones®" is mentioned, indicating laboratory testing on synthetic bone models. This is not clinical data.

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

• Not applicable for the reported tests. The tests are engineering verification tests, not diagnostic accuracy studies requiring expert-established ground truth.

4. Adjudication method for the test set:

• Not applicable. See point 3.

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:

• No MRMC study was mentioned or conducted. The device is a surgical guidance system, not a diagnostic AI tool for human readers.

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

• Not explicitly described as a standalone algorithm performance study. The "Total System Accuracy" test would assess the device's accuracy in guiding the surgical instrument, which is its primary function (albeit with a human surgeon operating the instrument under guidance). The text focuses on the mechanical and system accuracy of the guidance mechanism itself, not a diagnostic algorithm.

7. The type of ground truth used:

• For mechanical tests: Engineering specifications, precision measurements, or established physical benchmarks are the "ground truth."
• For biological tests: Standards (e.g., ISO 10993) and established laboratory protocols define the "ground truth" for material properties and effects.

8. The sample size for the training set:

• Not applicable. The document does not describe the development or training of an AI algorithm in the context of a "training set" for diagnostic performance.

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

• Not applicable. See point 8.

Summary of Device Performance (from the document's conclusion):
The primary conclusion is that "The design changes to the EPS sleeves have been verified using well established methods. The new design is functionally the same as the predicate device. The subject device different questions of safety and effectiveness. Therefore, the subject device is substantially equivalent to the predicate." This implies that all the listed performance tests were successfully passed, ensuring that the modified device remains as safe and effective as its predecessor.

Ask a specific question about this device

The Neocis Guidance System (NGS) is a computerized navigational system intended to provide assistance in both the planning (pre-operative) and the surgical (intra-operative) phases of dental implantation surgery. The system provides software to preoperatively plan dental implantation procedures and provides navigational guidance of the surgical instruments. The NGS is intended for use in partially edentulous adult patients who qualify for dental implants.

When Yomi Plan software is used for preplanning on third party PCs, it is intended to perform the planning (pre-operative) phase of dental implantation surgery. Yomi Plan provides pre-operative planning for dental implantation procedures. The output of Yomi Plan is to be used with the Neocis Guidance System (NGS).

In terms of FDA regulations, the Neocis Guidance System (NGS) is a dental stereotaxic instrument (Product Code PLV) and a powered surgical device for bone cutting (21 CFR 872.4120).

In terms of previously FDA-cleared indications for use (K200805), the Neocis Guidance System (NGS) is a computerized navigational system intended to provide assistance in both the planning (pre-operative) and the surgical (intra-operative) phases of dental implantation surgery. The system provides software to preoperatively plan dental implantation procedures and provides navigational guidance of the surgical instruments. The NGS is intended for use in partially edentulous and fully edentulous adult patients who qualify for dental implants.

The system allows the user to plan the surgery virtually in Yomi Plan (K191363-cleared for use alone on third party PCs for preplanning). The operative plan is based on a cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) scan of the patient, which is used to create a 3-D model of the patient anatomy in our planning software. The plan is used by a guidance system to provide physical, visual, and audible feedback to the surgeon during the implant site preparation. The NGS robotic arm holds and guides a standard FDA-cleared third party powered bone cutting instrument (K191605).

The patient tracking portion of the NGS is comprised of linkages from the patient to the NGS, which include the Chairside Patient Splint (CPS) (K173402) or Edentulous Patient Splint (EPS) (K200805), the End Effector (EE) and the Patient Tracker (PT). The Patient Splint is attached to the contralateral side of the patient's mouth over stable teeth. The CPS is placed on the patient using on-label dental materials (K182776) prior to the presurgical CBCT scan. The EPS is placed using bone screws prior to the presurgical CBCT scan (appropriate local anesthesia is required). A Fiducial Array (FA) with radio-opaque fiducial markers is placed on the CPS prior to the CBCT scan so the virtual plan can be related to the physical space of the system using the markers. The PT is an electromechanical feedback system that is connected to the CPS on the patient, which relays information to the NGS in order to track patient movement. If patient movement occurs during the surgical procedure, the system will respond by altering the prescribed surgical cutting angle, position, and depth to accommodate the patient movement, which will maintain the accuracy of the osteotomy.

The implant process occurs in two phases: (1) The dental surgeon plans the surgical procedure with the planning software, on the day of surgery or sometime prior if a pre-operative CT scan was taken at an earlier visit. A virtual dental implant, selected from the dental implant library or using a generic model, both contained within our planning software, is placed at the desired location in the patient model. The software highlights critical anatomical structures to avoid, such as the inferior alveolar nerve. (2) When the dental implant plan is optimized, the NGS provides precise and accurate guidance of the dental surgical instruments according to the preoperative plan. The NGS robotic arm, which holds the surgical instrument, provides haptic feedback to the surgeon by constraining the motion of the bone cutting instrument to the plan. This allows the surgeon to feel resistance to attempts at motions that may deviate from the plan. The surgeon may modify the plan intraoperatively, if needed, has direct visualization of the patient anatomy, and is always in control of the surgical instrument.

Key safety features include:

• Emergency stop
• Safety pause
• Audio and visual queues
• Drill torque limits
• Full surgeon control and direct visualization of the surgical field

The Neocis Guidance System (NGS) with Yomi Plan v2.0 is a "catch-up" focused on the planning software and presenting changes made from v1.2 (K161399) to the current release v2.0 (wireless network capabilities, interface updates, etc.). The Neocis Guidance System (NGS) contains two software packages: (1) planning and (2) control. Each resides on a separate PC on the device: (1) planning station laptop PC and (2) control PC in the cart base. There are no changes to the control software or the NGS hardware in this submission. The use of TeamViewer has been implemented to access NGS systems that connected to external networks to examine system performance for postmarket.

The provided text describes a 510(k) premarket notification for the "Neocis Guidance System (NGS) with Yomi Plan v2.0". This submission primarily focuses on updates to the planning software (Yomi Plan v2.0) and the addition of wireless network capabilities. It does not include detailed acceptance criteria or a study proving device performance against those criteria in the way a clinical trial or algorithm validation study typically would. Instead, it relies on demonstrating substantial equivalence to previously cleared predicate devices through comparisons of technological characteristics, software verification and validation, and wireless coexistence testing.

Therefore, many of the requested details cannot be extracted from the provided document as they are not present.

Here's what can be inferred or stated based on the document:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance:

The document does not explicitly list "acceptance criteria" and "reported device performance" in a table format for a specific clinical or performance outcome. Instead, it focuses on demonstrating that the updated software (Yomi Plan v2.0) and new wireless features do not negatively impact the system's intended use and maintain substantial equivalence to predicate devices.

The "Performance Testing" section (Page 8) mentions that "Software V&V has been fully executed" and "Wireless Coexistence was testing according to the following". This implies that the acceptance criteria for these aspects would be compliance with the listed standards and successful execution of the validation activities.

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

• Test Set Sample Size: Not explicitly stated for performance testing (e.g., how many cases or patients were used in end-user validation).
• Data Provenance: Not specified. The end-user validation was performed in a "simulated use environment." This suggests it was not a real-world patient study.

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

• Number of Experts: Not specified.
• Qualifications of Experts: Not specified.

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

• Not specified.

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:

• No MRMC comparative effectiveness study is mentioned. The device provides "navigational guidance" but is not primarily an AI-driven diagnostic or interpretative tool evaluated by human readers in this context. The focus is on the safety and effectiveness of the updated planning software and wireless functionality.

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

• The document implies that the "planning software" (Yomi Plan) is part of a "computerized navigational system" that provides "navigational guidance of the surgical instruments" to a surgeon. The system provides "haptic feedback to the surgeon" and emphasizes "Full surgeon control and direct visualization of the surgical field." This indicates a human-in-the-loop system. Standalone algorithm performance without human interaction is not the primary focus or explicitly described for the system's core function. The "planning" component could be considered "standalone" in its ability to create a plan, but its output is used by the guidance system in a human-controlled surgical procedure.

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

• For the software V&V, the "ground truth" would be adherence to software requirements, standards, and risk management principles. For wireless coexistence, it would be compliance with communication standards. For "End User Validation," it's ensuring the system "meet[s] the needs of the user," which implies functional correctness and usability in a simulated surgical context. Specific clinical ground truth based on patient outcomes or expert pathological review is not detailed in this submission as it's not a diagnostic AI device.

8. The sample size for the training set:

• The document describes a software update for a guidance system and does not mention machine learning or AI training sets. Therefore, this information is not applicable and not provided.

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

• Not applicable, as no training set for machine learning/AI is mentioned.

Ask a specific question about this device

The Neocis Guidance System (NGS) is a computerized navigational system intended to provide assistance in both the planning (pre-operative) and the surgical (intra-operative) phases of dental implantation surgery. The system provides software to preoperatively plan dental implantation procedures and provides navigational guidance of the surgical instruments.

In terms of FDA regulations, the Neocis Guidance System (NGS) is a dental stereotaxic instrument (Product Code PLV) and a powered surgical device for bone cutting (21 CFR 872.4120).

In terms of previously FDA-cleared indications for use, the Neocis Guidance System (NGS) (K161399) is a computerized navigational system intended to provide assistance in both the planning (pre-operative) and the surgical (intra-operative) phases of dental implantation surgery. The system provides software to preoperatively plan dental implantation procedures and provides navigational guidance of the surgical instruments.

The system allows the user to plan the surgery virtually in our Neocis Planning Software Application installed on the NGS planning station or on a 3rd party PC (K191363). The operative plan is based on a cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) scan of the patient, which is used to create a 3-D model of the patient anatomy in our planning software. The plan is used by a guidance system to provide physical, visual, and audible feedback to the surgeon during the implant site preparation. The NGS robotic arm holds and guides a standard FDA-cleared powered bone cutting instrument (K191605).

The patient tracking portion of the NGS is comprised of linkages from the patient to the NGS, which include the Chairside Patient Splint (CPS) (K173402), the End Effector (EE) and the Patient Tracker (PT). The Patient Splint is attached to the contralateral side of the patient's mouth over stable teeth. The CPS is placed on the patient using on-label dental materials (K182776) prior to the presurgical CBCT scan. A Fiducial Array (FA) with radio-opaque fiducial markers is placed on the CPS prior to the CBCT scan so the virtual plan can be related to the physical space of the system using the markers. The PT is an electromechanical feedback system that is connected to the CPS on the patient, which relays information to the NGS in order to track patient movement. If patient movement occurs during the surgical procedure, the system will respond by altering the prescribed surgical cutting angle, position, and depth to accommodate the patient movement, which will maintain the accuracy of the osteotomy.

The implant process occurs in two phases: (1) The dental surgeon plans the surgical procedure with the planning software, on the day of surgery or sometime prior if a pre-operative CT scan was taken at an earlier visit. A virtual dental implant, selected from the dental implant library or using a generic model, both contained within our planning software, is placed at the desired location in the patient model. The software highlights critical anatomical structures to avoid, such as the inferior alveolar nerve. (2) When the dental implant plan is optimized, the NGS provides precise and accurate guidance of the dental surgical instruments according to the preoperative plan. The NGS robotic arm, which holds the surgical instrument, provides haptic feedback to the surgeon by constraining the motion of the bone cutting instrument to the plan. This allows the surgeon to feel resistance to attempts at motions that may deviate from the plan. The surgeon may modify the plan intraoperatively, if needed, has direct visualization of the patient anatomy, and is always in control of the surgical instrument.

Key safety features include:

• Emergency stop
• Safety pause
• Audio and visual queues
• Drill torque limits
• Surgeon control

The subject device in this submission is the new Clamped Chairside Patient Splint (C-CPS). The C-CPS offers our users an alternative to acrylic-type dental material affixation. The subject device replaces the acrylic-type dental material locking mechanism of affixation with a clamplike mechanism of affixation using softer dental impression (registration) material, alignment slots, and an approximation screw. The clamping screw is not a bone screw, and it does not interact directly with the patient. The screw is positioned above the teeth inside the splint. The subject device is essentially a CPS (K173402) that has been bisected lengthwise with screw holes and alignment slots in each half to approximate the two halves around the patient's stable teeth. The dental impression material is placed inside the splint to form a tight conformational gripping surface between the splint and the teeth. The dental impression material conforms the shape of the patient's teeth to form a large gripping surface area. The C-CPS initial placement is like a dental impression tray. A torque-brake screwdriver with hex bit is used to tighten and loosen the screw. The proper C-CPS model (left/right or anterior/posterior) should be selected based upon the accommodation of the patient's anatomy and the intended surgical location.

The provided text describes a 510(k) premarket notification for the Neocis Guidance System (NGS) with Clamped Chairside Patient Splint (C-CPS). The submission aims to demonstrate substantial equivalence to a predicate device, the NGS with Chairside Splint (K173402), by introducing a new clamping mechanism for the patient splint.

Here's an analysis of the acceptance criteria and study information provided:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance:

The document primarily focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence to the predicate device and lists several identical technological characteristics, including system accuracy specifications.

Ask a specific question about this device