Search Results

Intended Use: Plate and screw Implants are intended for temporary fixation, correction or stabilization of bones in various anatomical regions.

One-Quarter Tubular Plates 2.4/2.7 are indicated for fixation of fractures of the foot, hand, wrist, and forearm (including radius). The plates should only be used for load-sharing purposes, e.g., buttressing, tension banding, neutralization, or compression.

Straight Plates 2.4/2.7 are indicated for fixation of fractures, osteotomies, malunions and nonunions of the foot, hand, wrist, and forearm (including radius) and arthrodesis of small bones of the foot and hand.

Reconstruction Plates 2.4/2.7 are indicated for fixation of fractures of the foot, hand, wrist, and forearm (including radius)

Radius Distal Styloid Plate 2.4/2.7 is indicated for the fixation for fractures of the radial styloid that have metaphyseal comminution or as an adjunct to either volar of dorsal plate fixation when additional support of the radial styloid is required.

The Radius Proximal head plates 2.4/2.7 are indicated for extra-articular and intra-articular fractures of the proximal radius and multifragmented radial neck fractures.

The Radius Distal Volar Plates 2.4/2.7 are indicated for the fixation for fractures, fusions, or osteotomies of the distal radius.

One-Third Tubular Plates 3.5 are indicated for fixation of fractures of the elbow (distal humerus and ulna), and fibula. The plates should only be used for load-sharing purposes, e.g., buttressing, tension banding, neutralization, or compression.

Reconstruction Plates 3.5 are indicated for fixation of fractures of the elbow (distal humerus and ulna), wrist, and forearm (including radius), fibula, and calcaneus

Straight Plates 3.5 are indicated for fixation of fractures, osteotomies, malunions and nonunions of the elbow (distal humerus and ulna), wrist, forearm (including radius), and fibula.

Tibia T-Plates 3.5 are indicated for buttressing of partial articular fractures and bone fragments of the distal tibia.

The Clavicle Superior Plates 3.5 are indicated for:

• Fractures of the clavicle shaft
• Fractures of the lateral clavicle
• Malunions of the clavicle
• Non-unions of the clavicle

The Clavicle Hook Plate 3.5 is indicated for fixation of lateral clavicle fractures and dislocations of the acromioclavicular joint.

The Humerus Proximal Plates 3.5 are indicated for the fixation of fractures, fracture dislocations, non-unions and osteotomies of the proximal humerus.

The Tibia Proximal Lateral Plates 3.5 are indicated for:

• Split-type fractures of the lateral tibial plateau
• Lateral split fractures with associated depressions
• Pure central depression fractures
• Split or depression fractures of the medial plateau

The Tibia Distal Medial Plates 3.5 are indicated for the fixation of fractures, osteotomies, and non-unions of the distal tibia.

The Tibia Distal Anterolateral Plates 3.5 are indicated for the fixation of fractures, osteotomies, and non-unions of the distal tibia.

The Humerus Distal Dorsolateral Plates 2.7/3.5 are indicated for

• Intraarticular fractures of the distal humerus
• Supracondylar fractures of the distal humerus
• Non-unions of the distal humerus

The Humerus Distal Medial Plates 2.7/3.5 are indicated for

• Intraarticular fractures of the distal humerus
• Supracondylar fractures of the distal humerus
• Non-unions of the distal humerus

The Ulna Proximal Olecranon Plates 3.5 are indicated for

• Complex extra- and intra-articular olecranon fractures
• Non-unions of the proximal ulna
• Osteotomies
• Simple olecranon fractures

Broad Curved Plates 4.5/5.0 are indicated for fixation of fractures, osteotomies, malunions and nonunions of humerus, femur, and tibia.

Broad Plates 4.5/5.0 are indicated for fixation of fractures, osteotomies, malunions and nonunions of humerus, femur, and tibia.

Narrow Plates 4.5/5.0 are indicated for fixation of fractures, osteotomies, malunions and nonunions of humerus, and distal tibia.

T Plate 4.5/5.0 is intended to buttress metaphyseal fractures of the proximal humerus, medial tibial plateau and distal tibia. The plates should only be used for load-sharing purposes, e.g., buttressing, tension banding, neutralization, or compression.

T-Buttress Plates 4.5/5.0 are intended to buttress metaphyseal fractures of the proximal humerus, medial tibial plateau and distal tibia. The plates should only be used for load sharing purposes, e.g., buttressing, tension banding, neutralization, or compression.

LL-Buttress Plates 4.5/5.0 are intended to buttress metaphyseal fractures of the proximal humerus, medial tibial plateau and distal tibia. The plates should only be used for load sharing purposes, e.g., buttressing, tension banding, neutralization, or compression.

Femur Distal Plates 4.5/5.0 are indicated for distal shaft fractures, supracondylar fractures, intraarticular fractures, and periprosthetic fractures of the distal femur

Tibia Proximal Lateral Plates 4.5/5.0 are indicated for proximal shaft fractures, metaphyseal fractures, intra-articular fractures and periprosthetic fractures of the proximal tibia.

The Genostis Osteosynthesis System comprises of fracture fixation plates, corresponding screws and required surgical instruments. Different shapes and sizes are available to accommodate for different anatomical regions and locations of fractures. The plate screw interface is either locking, non-locking or, for some plates, realized by a combination hole offering both options (locking and non-locking).

All plates and screws are made of titanium alloy (Ti 6Al 4V ELI) according to ASTM F136 and ISO 5832-3.

The implants of the Genostis Osteosynthesis System are sterilized by radiation and are delivered sterile.

The provided FDA 510(k) clearance letter for the Genostis Osteosynthesis System does not describe a study involving an AI/software device or human readers. Instead, it describes a traditional medical device (bone fixation plates and screws) and primarily references non-clinical (biomechanical and biocompatibility) testing to demonstrate substantial equivalence to predicate devices.

Therefore, many of the requested criteria related to AI/software performance, human reader studies, and ground truth establishment in a diagnostic context are not applicable to this document.

However, I can extract and structure the information that is relevant to the device's acceptance criteria based on the provided text, particularly concerning non-clinical testing.

Here's the breakdown based on the information available:

Acceptance Criteria and Study for Genostis Osteosynthesis System

The Genostis Osteosynthesis System is a traditional medical device (bone fixation plates and screws), not an AI/software diagnostic device. As such, the "acceptance criteria" and "study" proving it meets them are primarily based on non-clinical engineering and biological tests, not AI performance metrics or human-in-the-loop diagnostic studies.

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

Note: The document states "All results were satisfactory" for all tests, indicating the device met the pre-defined acceptance criteria for each test.

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

• Sample Size: The document does not specify the exact number of units or samples used for each biomechanical or biocompatibility test. It generally states that testing was "performed" and "conducted on final sterile product."
• Data Provenance: Not explicitly stated as "country of origin," but testing would be performed in a controlled laboratory environment. The tests are non-clinical (biomechanical and biocompatibility), not data from patients. The study is by nature prospective in that new manufactured devices were tested to meet the standards, not a retrospective analysis of existing data.

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

• Not Applicable. This is a medical device (hardware) clearance, not an AI/software diagnostic device that requires expert ground truth for interpretation of medical images or other diagnostic data. The "ground truth" here is the adherence to established engineering and biocompatibility standards.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set

• Not Applicable. As this is non-clinical mechanical and biocompatibility testing, there is no "adjudication" in the sense of reconciling expert opinions on diagnostic findings. The results are quantitative and objective measurements against established standard thresholds.

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

• Not Applicable. MRMC studies are for evaluating clinical interpretation of diagnostic results, typically with AI assistance. This device is a physical implant, not a diagnostic tool or AI.

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

• Not Applicable. This pertains to AI algorithm performance. The device is a bone fixation system and does not rely on an algorithm for its primary function.

7. The Type of Ground Truth Used

• Pre-defined Standards and Controls: The "ground truth" for this device's performance is established by well-defined, internationally recognized (ISO) and American (ASTM) standards for material properties, mechanical strength, and biocompatibility. The device must perform within the specified parameters of these standards. For example, screws must meet certain torque resistance (ASTM F543), and plates must meet specific load-sharing characteristics (ASTM F382).

8. The Sample Size for the Training Set

• Not Applicable. This device does not involve a "training set" in the context of machine learning or AI.

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

• Not Applicable. There is no "training set" for this type of medical device clearance. The design and manufacturing processes are established based on engineering principles and existing predicate device designs, with performance validated against the standards mentioned above.

Ask a specific question about this device

DePuy Synthes 3.5 mm/4.5 mm VA-LCP PPFx Proximal Femur Plates and Proximal Femur Hook Plates are indicated for the treatment of periprosthetic fractures in the presence of intramedullary implants in the proximal end segment and the proximal and middle 1/3 of the diaphyseal segment of the femur, and non-unions of such fractures, in adult patients, particularly in osteoporotic and osteopenic bone.

DePuy Synthes 3.5 mm VA Locking Attachment Plate is indicated to augment the stabilization of fractures, including periprosthetic fractures (Vancouver Type B when used with either the 3.5 mm VA-LCP PPFx Proximal Femur Plate or Proximal Femur Hook Plate; Vancouver Type B and C when used with other DePuy Synthes LCP plates and VA-LCP plates) and fractures in the presence of intramedullary implants, in the femur, tibia, and humerus.

DePuy Synthes 3.5 mm VA Locking PPFx Distal Femur Spanning Attachment Plates (when used with either 3.5 mm/4.5 mm VA-LCP PPFx Proximal Femur Plate or the Proximal Femur Hook Plate) can be used to extend the length of a plate construct to the lateral condyles.

DePuy Synthes 3.5 mm VA Locking PPFX Greater Trochanter Ring Attachment Plates (when used with 3.5 mm/4.5 mm VA-LCP PPFx Proximal Femur Plate) are indicated for fixation or re-attachment of the greater trochanter following fracture or osteotomy.

DePuy Synthes 3.5 mm VA Locking PPFX Greater Trochanter Hook Plates are indicated for fixation or re-attachment of the greater trochanter following fracture or osteotomy.

The DePuy Synthes 3.5/4.5 mm Variable Angle LCP Periprosthetic Proximal Femur Plating System of Stainless Steel Plates for periprosthetic fractures. It consists of plates that offer screw to plate non-locking constructs, locking constructs or a combination of both. The plates accept commercially available DePuy Synthes Stainless Steel 3.5 mm cortex screws, 3.5 mm (variable angle) locking screws, 4.5 mm cortex screws and 5.0 mm (variable angle) locking screws, as well as the Synthes Orthopaedic Cable system.

The DePuy Synthes 3.5/4.5 mm Variable Angle LCP Periprosthetic Proximal Femur Plating System offers:
• 3.5 mm/4.5 mm VA-LCP PPFx Proximal Femur Plates
• 3.5 mm/4.5 mm VA-LCP PPFx Proximal Femur Hook Plates
• 3.5 mm VA Locking PPFx Distal Femur Spanning Attachment Plate
• 3.5 mm VA Locking PPFx Greater Trochanter Hook Plate
• 3.5 mm VA Locking PPFx Greater Trochanter Ring Attachment Plate
• 3.5 mm VA Locking Attachment Plate

This document is a 510(k) Premarket Notification from the FDA for a medical device. It describes the device, its intended use, and its comparison to predicate devices, along with non-clinical performance data. However, it does NOT describe an AI/ML powered device, nor does it contain any information about a study proving device meets acceptance criteria related to AI/ML performance, such as human reader improvement with AI assistance, standalone algorithm performance, or the establishment of ground truth by multiple experts.

Therefore, I cannot provide the requested information. The document focuses on the substantial equivalence of a physical orthopedic implant system to existing predicate devices, based on mechanical, MRI compatibility, sterilization, shelf-life, and biological safety testing. It does not mention any AI or machine learning components.

Ask a specific question about this device

ARMAR™ / ARTIS™ Small Fragment and Calcaneal Plates & MBOSS™/FIXION™ Screws are indicated for temporary internal fixation and stabilization of osteotomies and fractures, such as:

• comminuted fractures
• supracondylar fractures
• extra-articular fractures
• fractures in osteopenic bone
• nonunions
• malunions
  Smaller-sized ARMAR™ / ARTISTM plates are used for small bones and small fragments of the hands and feet.
  ARMARTM / ARTIS™ Calcaneal plates are indicated for temporary internal fixation and stabilization of osteotomies and fractures of the calcaneous.

ARMAR™ / ARTIS™ Humerus and Olecranon plates & MBOSSTM/FIXIONT™ Screws are intended for fractures and fracture dislocations, osteotomnies, and non-unions of the distal and proximal humerus, olecranon, and ulna in adult, particularly in osteopenic bone.
Specifically, distal humerus plates are indicated for intra-articular fractures, comminuted supracondylar fractures, osteotomies, malunions and non-unions of the distalhumerus. Olecranon and Proximal ulna plates are indicated for fractures, osteotomies, malunions and non-unions of the olecranon and proximal ulna.

ARMARTM / ARTISTM Tibia and Buttress Plates & MBOSS™/FIXION™ Screws are intended for fixation of the ankle in adults. Specifically,

• Anterolateral Distal Tibia Plates are intended for fixation of osteotomies, fractures, nonunions, malunions, and replantations of bones and bone fragments of the diaphyseal and metaphyseal regions of the distal tibia.
• Medial Distal and Proximal Tibia Plates are intended for fixation of osteotomies, fractures, nonunions, malunions, and replantations of bones and bone fragments of the diaphyseal and metaphyseal regions of the distal tibia,
• L Buttress and T Buttress Plates are intended to buttress partial articular fractures and bone fragments of the distal tibia, and
• Proximal Lateral Tibia Plates are intended for fixation of osteotomies, fractures, nonunions, malunions, and replantations of bones and bone fragments of the diaphyseal and metaphyseal regions of the distal tibia, a Distal Tibia T Plates and Distal Tibia L Plates are intended to buttress partial articular fractures and bone fragments of the distal tibia.

ARMAR™ / ARTISTM 2.4mm Plates & MBOSS™/FIXION™ Screws are intended for Fixation of complex intra- and extra-articular fractures and osteotomnies of the distal radius and other small bones in adults.

ARMARTM / ARTISTM Clavical Hook Plate & MBOSS™/FIXION™ Screws is intended for fixation of lateral clavicle fractures and dislocations of the acromioclavicular joint.

ARMARTM / ARTISTM Metaphyseal Plate & MBOSS™/FIXION™ Screws indicated for fractures, osteotomies, and non-unions of the radius and other small bones. Additionally, the Metaphyseal Plate is intended for pelvic and acetabular reconstructive surgery and fracture fixation of the distal humerus, clavicle, and scapula.

ARMARTM / ARTISTM Calcaneal Plate & MBOSS™/FIXION™ Screws is intended for fixation of complex extra-articular and intra-articular fractures and osteotomies of the calcaneus.

The Meril Healthcare Trauma System utilizes screws and plates of various lengths and designs to accommodate a variety of patient anatomies. The Trauma System utilizes medical grade stainless steel and titanium. Trauma System implant are provided clean and non-sterile with instructions for steam sterilization. The instruments are provided non-sterile and are reusable. The implants are provided nonsterile and are single use only.

This document is a 510(k) premarket notification decision letter from the FDA regarding a medical device, specifically bone plates and screws. It does not contain information about an AI/ML device, AI acceptance criteria, or a study proving an AI device meets acceptance criteria.

Therefore, I cannot extract the requested information regarding AI device performance, acceptance criteria, sample sizes, expert ground truth, MRMC studies, or training/test set details from this document. The document describes the substantial equivalence of bone fixation appliances to existing predicate devices based on technological characteristics and mechanical performance data (e.g., static four-point bending, dynamic four-point bending, static torsion, static axial pullout).

Ask a specific question about this device

The ANTHEM™ Fracture System is indicated for fixation of fractures, arthrodesis and reconstruction of bones for the appropriate size of the device to be used in adult patients, including the clavicle, scapula, humerus, radius, ulpa, small bones (metacarpals, metatarsals, phalanges), wrist, pelvis, fibula, ankle, and foot. Small fragment and distal fibula plates may be used in all pediatric subgroups (except neonates) and small stature adults. Distal radius plates may be used in adolescents (12-21 years of age).

The ANTHEM™ Fracture System is a family of plates and screws designed to be used for internal bone fixation. The implants are available in various sizes and shapes to accommodate patient anatomy, and may be contoured or straight, sterile and non-sterile, with locking and non-locking screws. ANTHEM™ implants are manufactured from medical grade titanium alloy, cobalt chromium molybdenum alloy, or stainless steel. All implants are for single use only.

This document is a 510(k) Summary for the ANTHEM™ Fracture System, a medical device. Based on the provided text, there is no study described that proves the device meets specific acceptance criteria based on AI/algorithm performance, nor is there any mention of an AI device. The document explicitly describes the ANTHEM™ Fracture System as a system of "plates and screws designed to be used for internal bone fixation."

Therefore, I cannot provide the requested information regarding:

• A table of acceptance criteria and reported device performance related to AI/algorithmic accuracy.
• Sample size and data provenance for an AI test set.
• Number of experts and qualifications for AI ground truthing.
• Adjudication method for an AI test set.
• MRMC comparative effectiveness study for AI assistance.
• Standalone AI performance.
• Type of ground truth used for AI.
• Sample size for training set for AI.
• How ground truth for a training set was established for AI.

The document focuses on the mechanical and material performance of bone fixation devices, not on diagnostic or AI-driven performance.

Here's a summary of the performance data that is mentioned in the document, which pertains to the physical device itself:

1. Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance (for the physical device):

• Acceptance Criteria (Implicit Standard Performance): The device's performance was evaluated in accordance with recognized ASTM standards for bone fixation devices. This implies that the device had to meet performance benchmarks defined by these standards to demonstrate substantial equivalence to predicate devices. While specific numerical acceptance criteria are not explicitly stated (e.g., "minimum bending strength of X N-m"), the adherence to these standards serves as the implicit acceptance criteria for mechanical performance.
• Reported Device Performance:
  • Tests Conducted: Engineering analysis, bending strength tests (for plates and screws), pullout strength tests (for screws), and insertion/removal torque tests (for screws).
  • Outcome: "Performance data demonstrates substantial equivalence to the predicate devices."
  • Bacterial Endotoxin Testing (BET): Conducted in accordance with ANSI/AAMI ST-72:2011 to ensure sterility or low endotoxin levels.

2. Sample Size and Data Provenance (for the physical device testing):

• The document does not specify the sample sizes used for the mechanical performance tests (e.g., how many plates or screws were tested for bending strength).
• The data provenance is not mentioned (e.g., where the tests were conducted, whether the materials were from specific batches, etc.).

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

• Not applicable. This document is about a physical medical device (bone plates and screws), not an AI algorithm requiring expert review for ground truth.

4. Adjudication method for the test set:

• Not applicable. This document is about a physical medical device (bone plates and screws), not an AI algorithm.

5. If a multi reader multi case (MRMC) comparative effectiveness study was done...:

• Not applicable. This document is about a physical medical device (bone plates and screws), not an AI algorithm.

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

• Not applicable. This document describes a physical medical device, not an algorithm.

7. The type of ground truth used:

• For the physical device, "ground truth" would be the objective measurements obtained from standardized mechanical tests (e.g., actual force at failure, actual torque values) against the requirements of the ASTM standards.

8. The sample size for the training set:

• Not applicable, as this is not an AI/machine learning device.

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

• Not applicable, as this is not an AI/machine learning device.

Ask a specific question about this device

The Synthes 4.5mm VA-LCP Curved Condylar Plate System is indicated for buttressing multifragmentary distal femur fractures including: supra-condylar; intra-articular and extra-articular condylar fractures, periprosthetic fractures, fractures in normal or osteopenic bone, nonunions and malunions.

The DePuy Synthes Variable Angle Positioning Pins are intended for use with cerclage multifilament cable to augment fracture stabilization with plates used in long bone fixation, when screw placement would be inhibited, as in the presence of intramedullary implant. The Variable Angle Positioning Pins are designed for use with Variable Angle LCP plate implants featuring variable angle locking holes that accept 5.0 mm variable angle bone screws.

The Synthes 4.5mm VA-LCP Curved Condylar Plate System consists of anatomically-contoured, stainless steel and titanium plates and screws featuring variable angle locking and combi-holes designed to provide stable fixation of the distal femur and system-specific instrumentation. The current 510(k) introduces OPTILINK™ Technology stainless steel screws, positioning pins for cerclage cable, and system-specific instrumentation as a line extension to the currently cleared Synthes 4.5mm VA-LCP Curved Condylar Plate System.

The provided text is a 510(k) summary for the "Synthes 4.5mm VA-LCP Curved Condylar Plate System Line Extension, Variable Angle Positioning Pins". This document is a premarket notification for a medical device seeking substantial equivalence to existing devices. It focuses on demonstrating that the new device is as safe and effective as a legally marketed predicate device, rather than proving performance against specific acceptance criteria through a clinical study in the way one might for a novel AI device or a device requiring a PMA.

Therefore, the information typically requested in your prompt (e.g., sample size for test sets, number of experts for ground truth, MRMC studies, standalone algorithm performance, training set details) is not applicable to this type of regulatory submission. This submission primarily relies on non-clinical performance data and material characterization to demonstrate substantial equivalence to predicate devices, and explicitly states that "Clinical data was not needed to demonstrate the safety and effectiveness of the proposed devices."

Since this is a Class II device and a line extension, the focus is on mechanical and material testing to ensure it performs comparably to the predicate.

Here's an attempt to answer your questions based only on the information available in the provided text, acknowledging that many fields will be "Not Applicable" or "Not Provided" in this context:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

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

• Test Set Sample Size: Not provided. The document refers to "testing" and "evaluations" but does not specify the number of samples or specimens used in these mechanical or material tests.
• Data Provenance: Not specified, but generally refers to laboratory testing. Not applicable for retrospective/prospective human data.

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

• Not applicable. Ground truth as typically understood for AI/clinical studies (e.g., expert consensus on image interpretation) is not relevant for mechanical and material testing of an orthopedic implant. Performance is evaluated against engineering standards and specifications.

4. Adjudication method for the test set

• Not applicable. Performance is measured against predetermined test specifications and standards for mechanical and material properties. There is no "adjudication" in the clinical sense.

5. If a multi reader multi case (MRMC) comparative effectiveness study was done, If so, what was the effect size of how much human readers improve with AI vs without AI assistance

• Not applicable. This is not an AI device or an imaging device requiring human-in-the-loop performance evaluation.

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

• Not applicable. This is not an algorithm or software device.

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

• The "ground truth" equivalent in this context would be the established engineering standards and material specifications (e.g., ASTM standards, specified endotoxin limits) that the device must meet, and the performance characteristics of the predicate device for comparison.

8. The sample size for the training set

• Not applicable. This is not a machine learning or AI device.

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

• Not applicable. This is not a machine learning or AI device.

Summary based on the document:

The device (Synthes 4.5mm VA-LCP Curved Condylar Plate System Line Extension, Variable Angle Positioning Pins) demonstrates its performance and safety through non-clinical testing, material characterization, and comparison to a legally marketed predicate device (Synthes 4.5mm VA LCP Curved Condylar Plate System (K110354)) to establish "substantial equivalence." The evaluations included various mechanical tests (Dynamic Fatigue, Connection Strength, Torque, Torsional Properties, Insertion/Removal Torque, Pull-out Strength) and material tests including endotoxin and corrosion assessments. All performed tests indicated that the device met the required specifications and demonstrated substantial equivalence to the predicate device. No clinical data or human reader studies were deemed necessary for this 510(k) submission.

Ask a specific question about this device

NET Brand Small Fragment and Large Fragment Osteosynthesis System is intended for small and large bone fracture fixation, arthrodesis and osteotomy fixation. Examples include: fractures of the clavicle, scapula, humerus, olecranon, radius, ulna, distal femur, proximal tibial pilon, fibula, pelvis and acetabulum fractures; periprosthetic fractures; The use of locking plate/screw systems is suited for treatment of fractures in osteopenic bone. This system is not indicated for use in the spine.

NET Brand DHS/DCS plating system may be used for fixation of the fractures of proximal femur such as femoral neck, trochanteric, pertrochanteric or intertrochanteric zones.

NET Brand Small Fragment and Large Fragment Osteosynthesis Plating System consists of plates and screws in a variety of designs and sizes and made from Ti-6Al-4V alloy or stainless steel. Plates are provided in straight designs and in various geometric configurations that are commonly used in trauma and reconstructive surgery. Plates are provided with screw holes to accommodate non-locking and locking screws designs. Screws are provided in, 3.5mm Cortex Self-tapping, 4.5 mm Cortex self-tapping and 2.7mm self-tapping cortex locking, 3.5mm selftapping Cortex Locking, 5.0 mm cortex Locking thread designs in various lengths. This system is not indicated for use in spine.

NET Brand of DHS/DCS Plating System made from Ti-6Al-4V alloy or stainless steel and consist of DHS/DCS Plates, lag Screw, compression screw, and 4.5 Cortex screw Self Tapping, The DHS plates are available with barrel length 25mm (short barrel) and 38mm (Standard barrel) and barrel angels varies in 130° to 150°. The DCS plate is having angle of 95°

The DHS/DCS Screw is available in total length from 50 to 145 mm, thread length 22mm, shaft diameter 7 mm and outer diameter of 12.5. The thread of DHS/DCS Screw has a buttress type.

The DHS/DCS Compression Screw can be used to achieve fracture compression. Its dimension is available with thread length 36mm and outer diameter 4.0 mm.

The provided document is a 510(k) Premarket Notification for the "NET Brand Small Fragment and Large Fragment Osteosynthesis Plating System, NET Brand of DHS/DCS Plating System." This document aims to demonstrate substantial equivalence to legally marketed predicate devices, not to establish new performance criteria through a standalone study with acceptance criteria.

Therefore, the document does not contain the requested information about acceptance criteria and a study proving the device meets those criteria, as it is not a performance study in that sense.

Instead, the document focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence to predicate devices. This is achieved by comparing the new device's technological characteristics, intended use, materials, and performance (via testing against established ASTM standards) to those of already approved predicate devices.

Here's an explanation based on the provided text, addressing the points where information is available or noting its absence:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance:

The document does not define specific "acceptance criteria" for clinical performance in terms of sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, or similar metrics for a new diagnostic or prognostic device. Instead, it demonstrates compliance with recognized engineering and material standards to show that the device performs equivalently to previously approved devices.

The "reported device performance" is essentially a confirmation of conformance to established ASTM standards for bone plates and screws.

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

• Sample Size: The document does not specify a "sample size" in terms of patient cases or images, as it is a mechanical device submission. The testing involves mechanical specimens (e.g., plates and screws) tested according to the cited ASTM standards. The specific number of specimens tested for each standard is not detailed in this summary.
• Data Provenance: Not applicable as it's not a clinical or imaging study. The tests are mechanical and presumably conducted in a laboratory setting.

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

Not applicable. This is a submission for a bone fixation device, not a diagnostic device requiring expert interpretation for ground truth establishment. Mechanical testing relies on standardized methodologies, not expert consensus on clinical cases.

4. Adjudication method for the test set:

Not applicable for a mechanical device submission.

5. If a multi reader multi case (MRMC) comparative effectiveness study was done, If so, what was the effect size of how much human readers improve with AI vs without AI assistance:

Not applicable. This is a medical device for bone fixation, not an AI or diagnostic tool.

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

Not applicable. This is a medical device for bone fixation, not an algorithm.

7. The type of ground truth used:

The "ground truth" in this context is the established performance benchmarks defined by recognized industry standards (ASTM F382, ASTM F384, ASTM F543 for performance, and ASTM F136, ASTM F138, ASTM F139 for materials). The device is deemed acceptable if it conforms to these standards, indicating mechanical properties are comparable to legally marketed devices.

8. The sample size for the training set:

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

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

Not applicable, as there is no training set for this type of device submission. The "ground truth" for demonstrating substantial equivalence rests on adherence to material and performance standards, which are developed and accepted by the scientific and engineering community.

Ask a specific question about this device

The PERI-LOC™ Bone Plating and Screw System can be used for adult and pediatric patients, as well as patients with osteopenic bone. PERI-LOC™ bone plates and screws are indicated for fixation of pelvic, small and long bone fractures, including those of the tibia, fibula, femur, pelvis, acetabulum, metacarpals, metatarsals, humerus, ulna, radius, calcaneus and clavicle.

The PERI-LOC™ Bone Plating and Screw System represents titanium versions of stainless steel PERI-LOC™ Periarticular Locked Plating System bone plates and bone screws previously cleared under K082516, K061352, K051735, and K033669. Like the predicate devices, the PERI-LOC™ Bone Plating and Screw System devices feature various lengths of straight and contoured locking bone plates: locking and non-locking bone screws, washers, plus a screw adapter accessory. Bone plates in the PER/-LOC™ Bone Plating and Screw System feature a screw to-plate locking feature, which forms a locked, fixed-angle construct to aid in maintaining fracture reduction.

The provided text is a 510(k) summary for the PERI-LOC™ Bone Plating and Screw System. It describes the device, its intended use, and its substantial equivalence to predicate devices. However, this document does not contain information about acceptance criteria or a study that proves the device meets specific performance criteria.

The 510(k) pathway is primarily focused on demonstrating substantial equivalence to a legally marketed predicate device, rather than requiring new clinical studies to prove performance against specific acceptance criteria like those outlined in your request. While the device's technological characteristics are mentioned as being similar to predicate devices, there's no discussion of quantitative performance metrics, study designs, sample sizes, or ground truth establishment.

Therefore, I cannot populate the table or answer most of your detailed questions based solely on the provided text. The document focuses on regulatory approval through substantial equivalence, not on a detailed performance study with defined acceptance criteria.

Here's what I can infer or explicitly state based on the provided text:

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

2. Sample sized used for the test set and the data provenance (e.g. country of origin of the data, retrospective or prospective)

• Sample size for test set: Not applicable and not mentioned in the document. The 510(k) submission does not describe a performance test set.
• Data provenance: Not applicable. No performance data is presented.

3. 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. The document does not describe a study involving ground truth establishment by experts.

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

• Not applicable. No test set or adjudication process is described.

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 device is a bone plating and screw system, not an AI-based diagnostic tool for which MRMC studies are typically performed.

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

• Not applicable. This device is a mechanical implant, not an algorithm.

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

• Not applicable. The document does not reference performance studies that would require ground truth. The substantial equivalence argument relies on the established safety and effectiveness of predicate devices.

8. The sample size for the training set

• Not applicable. This submission doesn't describe an algorithm or a training set.

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

• Not applicable. This submission doesn't describe an algorithm or a training set.

Summary of what the document does communicate regarding evidence for substantial equivalence:

The "study" referenced in a 510(k) context is often the comparison to legally marketed predicate devices. The device's safety and effectiveness are supported by demonstrating that it has:

• Similar intended use.
• Similar technological characteristics (e.g., made of titanium like some predicate devices, screw-to-plate locking feature).
• No new questions of safety or effectiveness compared to those predicates.

The acceptance criteria for a 510(k) largely revolve around demonstrating this substantial equivalence, which is typically shown through engineering comparisons, material biocompatibility, and sometimes mechanical testing (though specific results of such tests are not detailed in this summary). The document lists several predicate devices (K082516, K072818, K061352, K051735, K033669, K993106, K000682, K000684, K011815) to which the PERI-LOC™ Bone Plating and Screw System is compared. The "study" proving it meets acceptance criteria is the regulatory review finding of substantial equivalence based on the submitted documentation comparing the device to these predicates.

Ask a specific question about this device