Search Results

The device is intended for use by a qualified physician for ultrasound evaluation of Fetal; Abdominal; Pediatric; Small Organ (breast, testes, thyroid); Neonatal Cephalic; Adult Cephalic; Cardiac (adult and pediatric); Peripheral Vascular; Musculo-skeletal Conventional and Superficial; Urology (including prostate); Transesophageal; Transrectal; Transvaginal; Intraoperative (abdominal, thoracic, and vascular), Intra-cardiac and Intra-luminal.

The GE Vivid-i and Vivid-q is compact and portable diagnostic ultrasound system with integrated keyboard, fold-up LCD type display and interchangeable electronic-array transducers. It has an overall size approximately 36 cm wide, 31.5 cm deep and 6 cm high in transport configuration and provides digital acquisition, processing and display capability. The user interface includes a computer keyboard, an intuitive layout of specialized controls, color GUI display and Doppler audio.

The GE Vivid-i and Vivid-q Diagnostic Ultrasound System is a compact and portable diagnostic ultrasound system.

Here's an analysis of the provided information, addressing your requested criteria:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

The provided document is a 510(k) summary for a premarket notification, seeking substantial equivalence to a predicate device. It primarily focuses on demonstrating that the modified device (GE Vivid-i and Vivid-q BT10) is as safe and effective as the previously cleared version (GE Vivid-i and Vivid-q BT09) and other cleared GE Ultrasound systems, and also to clear new transducers for specific indications. As such, it does not present a table of specific acceptance criteria (e.g., performance metrics like sensitivity, specificity, accuracy) that were met by the device itself in a typical clinical study, nor does it report numerical device performance against such criteria.

Instead, the acceptance criteria are implicitly related to:

• Safety and Effectiveness: The device being "substantially equivalent" to predicate devices in terms of safety and effectiveness.
• Conformance to Standards: Adherence to applicable medical device safety standards.
• Intended Uses: The modified device performing its stated indications for use reliably.

The document asserts that these criteria have been met through non-clinical tests and a comparison with the predicate.

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

No specific test set or clinical data (sample size, data provenance) is mentioned for evaluating the performance of the GE Vivid-i and Vivid-q BT10 system itself beyond the non-clinical tests. The submission states "Clinical Tests: None required."

For the new transducers (8C-RS, 4C-RS, SoundStar 3D 10F, AcuNav™ 8F), the document lists new indications for use that are "N = new indication (previously cleared by FDA...)" on other existing and cleared devices (GE LOGIQ Book K032477, Vivid 7 K051449, stand-alone devices K070242 by Biosense Webster, Inc., and K071234 by Siemens Medical Solutions). This implies that the safety and effectiveness for these indications with these transducers have been established in previous clearance processes and are being leveraged for this new comprehensive system. However, specific test set sizes or data provenance for these previous clearances are not detailed in this document.

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

Not applicable, as no dedicated clinical test set with ground truth establishment is described for this submission. The "Clinical Tests: None required" statement implies that existing knowledge and previous clearances were sufficient.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set

Not applicable, as no dedicated clinical test set with adjudication is described.

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

No MRMC comparative effectiveness study is mentioned. The submission relies on substantial equivalence and "Clinical Tests: None required."

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

The device is a diagnostic ultrasound system, not an algorithm-only device. Therefore, a standalone performance study in the context of an AI algorithm is not applicable. The device's performance is intrinsically linked to its use by a qualified physician.

7. Type of Ground Truth Used

Not explicitly stated for this particular submission, as "Clinical Tests: None required." For the previously cleared devices supporting the new indications for the transducers, ground truth would have been established through standard medical practices (e.g., expert clinical diagnosis, other imaging modalities, pathology, or surgical findings).

8. Sample Size for the Training Set

Not applicable. This document pertains to the clearance of a medical device (ultrasound system) and not the submission of an AI/ML algorithm that would typically involve a separate training set. The device's functionality is based on established ultrasound physics and signal processing, not a trained AI model in the modern sense.

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

Not applicable, as there is no mention of an AI/ML training set.

Ask a specific question about this device

The device is intended for use by a qualified physician for ultrasound evaluation of Fetal/Obstetrics; Abdominal/GYN; Pediatric; Small Organ (breast, testes, thyroid); Neonatal Cephalic; Adult Cephalic; Cardiac (adult and pediatric); Peripheral Vascular; Musculo-skeletal Conventional and Superficial; Urology (including prostate); Transesophageal; Transvaginal; and Intraoperative (abdominal, thoracic, and vascular).

The GE Vivid S6 are mobile ultrasound consoles having a wide assortment of electronic array transducers intended primarily for echocardiography with additional capability in vascular and general ultrasound imaging. Its intuitive user interface, high level of autooptimization along with significantly reduced size and weight maneuverable, efficient and easy to use.

The provided document K092079 is a 510(k) Premarket Notification for the GE Vivid S5 and Vivid S6 Diagnostic Ultrasound System. This submission focuses on establishing substantial equivalence to a predicate device and introducing new transducers and extended indications for use.

Crucially, the document states "Clinical Tests: None required." (Section b) 2. of Attachment B). This indicates that a study proving the device meets specific acceptance criteria, in the traditional sense of a clinical trial with performance metrics and statistical analysis, was not performed. Instead, the submission relies on the concept of substantial equivalence to a previously cleared predicate device (GE Vivid S5 and Vivid S6 Diagnostic Ultrasound System, K071985), and other previously cleared GE ultrasound systems/transducers for the new indications.

Therefore, the following information cannot be extracted from this document: acceptance criteria with reported device performance (beyond established safety standards), sample size for test set, data provenance, number of experts for ground truth, adjudication method, MRMC study details, standalone performance, or training set details.

The acceptance criteria for this submission are fundamentally satisfied by demonstrating that the modifications (new transducers and expanded indications for use) do not raise new questions of safety or effectiveness and perform as well as or better than legally marketed predicate devices.

Here's a breakdown of the available information relevant to "acceptance criteria" and how they were met in the context of a 510(k) submission focused on substantial equivalence:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance:

The study that proves the device meets the acceptance criteria is the 510(k) submission itself, where GE Healthcare argues for substantial equivalence based on the points above.

Missing Information (as per the document):

2. Sample size used for the test set and the data provenance: Not applicable, as no clinical tests were required or performed.
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 "ground truth" here is the regulatory precedent of previously cleared devices and transducers.
4. Adjudication method (e.g. 2+1, 3+1, none) for the test set: Not applicable.
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 diagnostic ultrasound system, not an AI-assisted diagnostic tool.
6. If a standalone (i.e. algorithm only without human-in-the-loop performance) was done: Not applicable.
7. The type of ground truth used (expert consensus, pathology, outcomes data, etc.): The "ground truth" for the new indications is the precedent of prior FDA clearance for similar technologies and applications on other GE ultrasound systems, signifying recognized safety and effectiveness.
8. The sample size for the training set: Not applicable, as no clinical tests or algorithm training were explicitly mentioned as part of this 510(k) submission for new device clearance. The device is a hardware/software system, not a machine learning model requiring a training set in the typical sense.
9. How the ground truth for the training set was established: Not applicable.

Ask a specific question about this device