Search Filters

Search Results

Found 1 results

510(k) Data Aggregation

    K Number
    K022632
    Device Name
    SIGN IM NAIL
    Date Cleared
    2002-09-23

    (47 days)

    Product Code
    Regulation Number
    888.3020
    Reference & Predicate Devices
    Why did this record match?
    Reference Devices :

    K010801, K021026, K972108

    AI/MLSaMDIVD (In Vitro Diagnostic)TherapeuticDiagnosticis PCCP AuthorizedThirdpartyExpeditedreview
    Intended Use

    The SIGN IM Nail is indicated for internal fixation of diaphyseal tibial fractures and distal femur fractures including transverse fractures, oblique and spiral fractures, comminuted fractures, fractures with bone loss, open fractures, corrective osteotomies, pathologic fractures, pseudoarthrosis of the tibial shaft, nonunions, malunions and fractures in the proximal femur.

    The SIGN IM Nail may be removed upon fracture healing.

    Device Description

    The SIGN IM Nail system includes Intramedullary nails, Interlocking Screws and Instruments. The SIGN IM Nail is manufactured from Solid Bar Stainless Steel, Type 316 as per ASTM F138. This device is available with diameters of 9mm, 11mm, 11mm, 12mm, 13mm and 14mm in the following lengths: 280mm, 300mm, 320mm, 340mm, 360mm, 380mm, 400mm. Each nail has holes and/or slots at both the distal and proximal ends to accept solid 4.5mm diameter cortical bone screws. Screws in a range from 25mm to 75mm in 5mm increments are supplied with the nails. Each nail uses distal and proximal bends to accommodate the shape of the femur.

    AI/ML Overview

    The provided text is a 510(k) Summary and FDA clearance letter for the "SIGN IM Nail." This type of document is for a medical device (an intramedullary nail for fracture fixation), not an AI/ML powered device or a diagnostic device that would typically have acceptance criteria focused on performance metrics like sensitivity, specificity, or AUC.

    Therefore, the requested information regarding acceptance criteria, study details (sample sizes, ground truth, experts, MRMC studies, standalone performance), and training set information is not applicable to this document.

    Instead, the document focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence to predicate devices. Substantial equivalence for devices like the SIGN IM Nail is typically proven through:

    • Comparison of design and materials: The document states the device is "manufactured from Solid Bar Stainless Steel, Type 316 as per ASTM F138" and details its dimensions.
    • Comparison of intended use and indications for use: The document provides a detailed list of indications for use, and states that this 510(k) "serves to extend the SIGN IM Nail line... by adding to the indications for use and providing a greater size range."
    • Comparison of performance data (if applicable to non-AI devices): For mechanical devices like this, performance data usually involves mechanical testing (e.g., fatigue, static bending strength, torsional strength) to demonstrate that the new device performs at least as well as, or better than, the predicate devices in terms of mechanical properties. This document does not explicitly detail such mechanical test results, but it would have been part of the full 510(k) submission. The FDA's clearance letter implicitly confirms that such data was found acceptable.
    • Safety information: The safety of the device is implicitly demonstrated by its similarity to long-marketed predicate devices and adherence to material standards.

    Since the prompt specifically asks for details relevant to AI/ML or diagnostic device performance studies, and this document does not contain that type of study, I cannot fill in the requested table or answer the specific questions about sample sizes, ground truth, expert adjudication, or MRMC studies.

    The closest analogue to "acceptance criteria" for this device would be that its design, materials, and mechanical performance (demonstrated via engineering tests, not clinical studies as described in the prompt) are substantially equivalent to and as safe and effective as the predicate devices.

    Ask a Question

    Ask a specific question about this device

    Page 1 of 1