Search Results

The Vectors Temporary Anchorage System is a threaded titanium dental implant screw intended to provide a fixed anchorage point for attachment of orthodontic appliances to facilitate the orthodontic movement of teeth. The device is used temporarily and is removed after orthodontic treatment. The screw is sterile and is intended for single use only.

The Vectors Temporary Anchorage System consists of sterile, single-use titanium screws that are available in 6, 8, 10, and 12mm lengths which are designed to aid in dental movement by providing a rigid skeletal fixation point. They are inserted into the bone and serve as a temporary anchor for various orthodontic tooth movements. The selfdrilling thread design allows for easy insertion and removal with the use of the system's driver. The product is sterilized using gamma radiation.

The provided text is a 510(k) summary for the Sybron Dental Specialties Vectors Temporary Anchorage System. This document focuses on establishing substantial equivalence to existing legally marketed devices, rather than presenting a study with specific acceptance criteria and performance data for the device itself.

Therefore, many of the requested items (acceptance criteria table, sample sizes, expert qualifications, adjudication methods, MRMC studies, standalone performance, training set details) are not applicable (N/A) because the regulatory pathway chosen (510(k)) does not require such studies for this type of device.

The core of this submission is to demonstrate that the new device is as safe and effective as pre-existing, legally marketed devices. This is typically done by comparing materials, design, intended use, and general performance characteristics, not through new clinical trials with detailed performance metrics.

Here's a breakdown based on the available information:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance:

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

• Sample Size (Test Set): Not Applicable (N/A) - No specific test set for performance evaluation is described.
• Data Provenance: Not Applicable (N/A) - The submission is based on comparison to existing predicate devices, not on new data from a test set.

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

• Number of Experts: Not Applicable (N/A)
• Qualifications of Experts: Not Applicable (N/A)

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set:

• Adjudication Method: Not Applicable (N/A)

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

• Was an MRMC study done? No.
• Effect size of human readers with AI vs. without AI assistance: Not Applicable (N/A) - This device is a physical implant, not an AI-assisted diagnostic or therapeutic tool.

6. Standalone (Algorithm Only) Performance Study:

• Was a standalone study done? No. This device is a physical implant, not an algorithm.

7. Type of Ground Truth Used:

• Type of Ground Truth: Not Applicable (N/A) - The "ground truth" in a 510(k) for this type of device is the safety and effectiveness of the predicate devices to which equivalence is claimed.

8. Sample Size for the Training Set:

• Sample Size (Training Set): Not Applicable (N/A) - No training set is relevant for this type of device submission.

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

• Ground Truth Establishment: Not Applicable (N/A) - No training set is relevant for this type of device submission.

Summary of Relevant Information from the Document:

While the document doesn't provide the requested study details, it does contain the following pertinent information:

• Device Name: Vectors Temporary Anchorage System
• Intended Use: To serve as a fixed anchorage point for attachment of orthodontic appliances to facilitate the orthodontic movement of teeth. The device is used temporarily and is removed after orthodontic treatment. The screw is sterile and is intended for single use only.
• Predicate Devices:
  • Medicon eG. Aarhus Anchorage System
  • Dentaurum, Tomas Pin
  • Imtec Corporation, Ortho Implant
  • Mondeal Medical Systems, Lomas Quattro
• Substantial Equivalence Claim: The Vectors Temporary Anchorage System is composed of the same material (titanium) and is substantially equivalent in application and function to the listed predicate devices.

Ask a specific question about this device

The First Check® Multi Drug Cup 12 for Marijuana (THC), Cocaine (COC), Amphetamine (AMP), Methamphetamine (MET), Ecstasy (MDMA), Opiates (OPI), Phencyclidine (PCP), Benzodiazepine (BZO), Barbiturates (BAR), Methadone (MTD), Tri-cyclic Antidepressants (TCA) and Oxycodone (OXY) is a preliminary screening test for the rapid detection of the twelve drugs listed above in human urine. The designated cut-off concentrations of these drugs are as follows: Marijuana at 50 ng/mL, Cocaine at 300 ng/mL, Amphetamine at 1000 ng/mL, Methamphetamine at 1000 ng/mL, Ecstasy at 500 ng/mL, Opiates at 2000 ng/mL, Phencyclidine at 25 ng/mL, Benzodiazepine at 300 ng/mL, Barbiturates at 300 ng/mL, Methadone at 300 ng/mL, Tri-cyclic Antidepressants at 1,000 ng/mL and Oxycodone at 100 ng/mL.

Special condition for use statement:
The BAR, BZO, TCA, OXY assay will yield preliminary positive results when BAR, BZO, TCA and OXY is ingested at or above therapeutic doses. There are no uniformly recognized drug levels for barbiturate, benzodiazepine, tricyclic antidepressant and oxycodone in urine. The Multi Drug Cup 12 shows the drug was or was not present at the cutoff level. Drug Our 12 enows and a preliminary analytical test result. A more specific alternate chemical method must be used in order to obtain a confirmed analytical result. Gas chromatography/mass spectrometry (GC/MS) is the preferred confirmatory method for most drugs (HPLC is the spectionely (Greatery method for Tri-cyclic Antidepressants). Clinical consideration and professional judgment should be applied to any drug of abuse test result, particularly when preliminary positive results are indicated.

This device is not intended for workplace testing. This device is intended for Home Use.

The test is intended for over-the-counter (OTC) consumer use as the first step in a two step process to provide consumers, including but not limited to concerned parents, with information concerning the presence or absence of the above stated drugs or their metabolites in a urine sample. Information regarding confirmatory testing - the second step in the process, along with the materials for shipping the urine specimen to the laboratory, is provided.

The First Check® Multi Drug Cup 12 for Marijuana (THC), Cocaine (COC), Amphetamine (AMP), Methamphetamine (MET), Ecstasy (MDMA), Opiates (OPI), Phencyclidine (PCP), Benzodiazepine (BZO), Barbiturates (BAR), Methadone (MTD), Tricyclic Antidepressants (TCA) and Oxycodone (OXY), like other commercially available drug screening tests, qualitatively detects the presence or absence of the above listed drugs and their metabolites in urine, using a one step, rapid chromatographic immunoassay which operates under the principle of recognition and formation of specific antibody/target drug complexes.
A drug-positive urine specimen will not generate a colored line in the test line region because of drug competition, while a drug-negative urine specimen will generate a line in the test region because of the absence of drug competition. To serve as a procedural control, a colored line will always appear at the control line region if the test has been performed properly. If a control line does not appear for any reason, the results are considered invalid and should not be interpreted. The sample should either be retested using a new First Check Multi Drug Cup 12 or the sample should be mailed in for confirmation.

Here's a breakdown of the acceptance criteria and the study information for the First Check® Multi Drug Cup 12, based on the provided text:

Acceptance Criteria and Device Performance

The acceptance criteria for this device are implicitly defined by its intended use as a preliminary screening test and its claim of substantial equivalence to predicate devices. The "reported device performance" directly addresses the ability of lay users to correctly operate and interpret the test.

Table 1: Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

• Marijuana (THC): 50 ng/mL
• Cocaine (COC): 300 ng/mL
• Amphetamine (AMP): 1000 ng/mL
• Methamphetamine (MET): 1000 ng/mL
• Ecstasy (MDMA): 500 ng/mL
• Opiates (OPI): 2000 ng/mL
• Phencyclidine (PCP): 25 ng/mL
• Benzodiazepine (BZO): 300 ng/mL
• Barbiturates (BAR): 300 ng/mL
• Methadone (MTD): 300 ng/mL
• Tri-cyclic Antidepressants (TCA): 1,000 ng/mL
• Oxycodone (OXY): 100 ng/mL |
  | Procedural Control Functionality | The device should include a procedural control to indicate correct test performance. | A colored line always appears at the control line region if the test has been performed properly. If not, results are invalid. |
  | Specificity to Target Drugs | The test should react specifically with the target drugs and their metabolites. | Analytical studies of the identical Ameditech, Inc ImmuTest Drug Screen Cup (K050186) indicate that the drug test reacts specifically with the listed drugs and their metabolites. |
  | Equivalence to Predicate Devices | The device's design, performance characteristics, materials, and manufacturing process should be substantially equivalent to legally marketed predicate devices. | The device is claimed to be identical to the Ameditech ImmuTest Drug Screen Cup (K050186) and substantially equivalent to the Accu-Stat Home Drug Test Cup and other commercially available drug screening tests. |

Study Information

The document describes one distinct study (a consumer study) and references analytical studies of an identical predicate device.

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

   • Consumer Study: The document states that a "consumer study" was conducted demonstrating performance in the hands of lay users. However, the sample size for the test set is NOT specified in the provided text. The data provenance (country of origin, retrospective/prospective) is also NOT specified. It is implied to be prospective for the purpose of evaluating lay user performance.
   • Analytical Studies: Analytical studies for the "identical Ameditech, Inc ImmuTest Drug Screen Cup (K050186)" are referenced for specificity. The sample size and data provenance for these analytical studies are NOT provided.

2. Number of experts used to establish the ground truth for the test set and the qualifications of those experts: This information is NOT provided for the consumer study, as the ground truth appears to be the observed performance of lay users. For the analytical studies, this information is also not provided, though it would typically involve laboratory analysis with established methods.

3. Adjudication method for the test set:

   • For the consumer study, the adjudication method for determining "excellent overall performance" is NOT explicitly described. It likely involved observation of user adherence to instructions and correct interpretation of results.
   • For the analytical studies, the adjudication method is NOT provided, but would typically be based on established laboratory analytical techniques.

4. 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. This is a point-of-care, qualitative immunoassay for home use, not an AI-assisted diagnostic device requiring human reader interpretation in a complex medical imaging context. The "readers" are the lay users themselves.

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

   • Yes, in spirit, the device's inherent function is primarily standalone. The "algorithm" is the biochemical reaction and visual display. The "human-in-the-loop" is the consumer who performs the test and interprets the visual lines. The analytical studies (though referenced from a predicate) serve this purpose by confirming the device's ability to detect drugs at specific concentrations independent of user interpretation, focusing on the chemical performance. The consumer study then validates how well lay users can interact with this standalone device.

6. The type of ground truth used:

   • Consumer Study: The ground truth for the consumer study appears to be human observation/assessment of lay user ability to correctly operate the device and interpret the visual results.
   • Analytical Studies (referenced from predicate): The ground truth for the analytical studies would be established laboratory methods (e.g., using spiked urine samples or confirmed positive/negative clinical samples) to verify the presence and concentration of drugs.

7. The sample size for the training set: There is no mention of a training set in the context of machine learning or AI, as this is a biochemical immunoassay device, not an AI/ML product.

8. How the ground truth for the training set was established: Not applicable, as there is no training set for an AI/ML model mentioned.

Ask a specific question about this device

For Infrared Lamp (Laser)

Vectra Genisys (Intelect XT) Laser Module and Vectra Genisys (Intelect XT) Laser Transportable Systems are indicated for topical heating for:

• temporary increase in local blood circulation
• temporary relief of minor muscle and joint aches, pains and stiffness
• relaxation of muscles
• temporary relief of muscle spasms
• temporary relief of minor pain and stiffness associated with arthritis

Vectra Genisys Laser System (Intelect XT Laser System)

I am sorry, but based on the provided documents, I cannot answer your request. The documents are a 510(k) clearance letter from the FDA for a medical device (Vectra Genisys Laser System) and its indications for use. They do not contain information about acceptance criteria, study details (sample size, data provenance, ground truth establishment, expert qualifications, adjudication methods), multi-reader multi-case studies, or standalone algorithm performance.

These documents primarily confirm that the device is substantially equivalent to a legally marketed predicate device and outline its approved indications for use. They do not describe the specific testing and validation studies typically required to demonstrate performance against acceptance criteria in the way your request specifies.

Ask a specific question about this device