Search Results

The Catalyst CSR Shoulder System is indicated for use in skeletally mature individuals with degenerative diseases of the glenohumeral joint where hemi- or total shoulder arthroplasty is determined by the surgeon to be the preferred method of treatment. The Catalyst CSR Shoulder System is intended for use in patients with the following conditions where the humeral head, neck and glenoid vault are of sufficient bone stock and the rotator cuff is intact or reconstructable.

• Osteoarthritis
• Avascular Necrosis
• Rheumatoid Arthritis
• Post-traumatic Arthritis
• Correction of functional deformity
  Both components of the Catalyst CSR Shoulder System are intended for cemented use only.

The Catalyst CSR Shoulder System is a bone preserving total shoulder prosthesis designed for use in patients where the humeral head, neck and glenoid vault are of sufficient bone stock and there is an intact or reconstructable rotator cuff. The design requires minimal bone resection, thus giving the patient an alternative to other total shoulder designs where more bone is removed.
This submission adds larger, standard (non-spherical) humeral components to the CSR Shoulder System. Like the previously cleared CSR humeral components, the Size H and Size I CSR standard humeral components are manufactured from cast Co-Cr-Mo alloy conforming to ASTM F75. They have a non-spherical polished surface for articulation with the glenoid component or the glenoid cavity of the scapula. The humeral components incorporate 4 pegs which assist with alignment and provide rotational stability. The four plane geometry of the back side of the humeral component matches four cut surfaces on the humeral head to recreate the geometry and thickness of the removed bone.
The CSR humeral components are compatible with previously cleared CSR 3 Peg glenoid components.

The provided text is a 510(k) premarket notification for a medical device called the "Catalyst CSR Shoulder System." This document does not describe acceptance criteria for an AI/ML powered device, nor a study proving a device meets such criteria. Instead, it details the indications for use, device description, and a summary of substantial equivalence for a physical shoulder prosthesis, with non-clinical testing performed on its components.

Therefore, I cannot provide the information requested in your prompt based on the provided text, as it pertains to an entirely different type of medical device submission.

Ask a specific question about this device

The Anatomical Shoulder System is intended for long-term implantation into the human shoulder joint in primary or revision, total or hemi shoulder arthroplasty. The system is intended to relieve pain and restore function in patients with adequate bone stock to support the prosthesis.

The ASHCOM Shoulder System is intended for reverse shoulder arthroplasty.

Hemi or Total Arthroplasty Application of the Anatomical Shoulder Humeral Stems and Domelock System
The Anatomical Shoulder Humeral Stems and Domelock System are indicated for
• Advanced wear and tear of the shoulder joint resulting from degenerative, posttraumatic or rheumatoid arthritis.
• Avascular necrosis.
• Conditions consequent to earlier operations.
• Omarthrosis.
• Rheumatoid arthritis.
• Revision of shoulder prosthesis.

The Humeral Stems Cemented are intended for cemented use and the Humeral Stems Uncemented are intended for uncemented use. When used in a total shoulder application, the Anatomical Shoulder Pegged and Keeled Glenoids Cemented and the Biomet all-polyethylene Keeled Glenoid are intended for cemented use only. The Biomet Modular Hybrid Glenoid is intended to be implanted with bone cement. The optional porous titanium peg may be inserted without bone cement. The optional polyethylene peg should be inserted with bone cement.

Reverse Application of the Anatomical Shoulder System and ASHCOM Shoulder System
• The Anatomical Shoulder Inverse/Reverse System and the ASHCOM Shoulder System are indicated for primary, fracture or revision total shoulder replacement for the relief of pain and significant disability due to gross rotator cuff deficiency.
• The patient's joint must be anatomically and structurally suited to receive the selected implants and a functional deltoid muscle is necessary to use the device.

The Humeral Stems Cemented are intended for cemented use and the Humeral Stems Uncemented are intended for uncemented use. When used with the Anatomical Shoulder Glenoid Fixation, it is intended for uncemented use and requires two screws for fixation.

Fracture Application of the Anatomical Shoulder Fracture System
The Anatomical Shoulder Fracture System is intended for use in prosthetic replacement of the proximal humerus and the glenoid articular surface of the scapula during total-, hemi and fracture shoulder arthroplasty in treatment of the following:
• Complex 3- and 4-part fractures of the proximal humerus with subluxation of the head fragment
• Complex 3- and 4-part fractures of the proximal humerus with loosening of the spongiosa in the head fragment
• Complex 3- and 4-part fractures of the proximal humerus with additional cross split of the head fragment
• Fracture instability after osteosynthesis of 3- and 4part fracture fragments of the proximal humerus
• Posttraumatic necrosis of the humeral head
• Posttraumatic arthrosis after humeral head fracture

The Humeral Fracture Stems are intended for either cemented or uncemented use. When used in a total shoulder application, the Anatomical Shoulder Pegged and Keeled Glenoids Cemented are intended for cemented use only.

Anatomical Shoulder Combined System
Advanced destruction of the shoulder joint resulting from:
• Omarthrosis.
• Rheumatoid arthritis
• Post-traumatic arthritis
• Avascular necrosis of the humeral head
• Cuff-tear arthropathy (Bigliani/Flatow Heads with heights of 27mm or greater)
• Conditions following earlier operations (including revision shoulder arthroplasty).

The Anatomical Shoulder Combined System is intended for cemented or cementless use.

When used with the following humeral stems the Anatomical Shoulder Combined System is intended for cemented use:
• Anatomical Shoulder Standard Cemented Humeral Stem.
• Anatomical Shoulder Revision Stem.

When used with the following humeral stem the Anatomical Shoulder Combined System is intended for cementless use:
• Anatomical Shoulder Standard Uncemented Stem.

When used with the following humeral stems the Anatomical Shoulder Combined System is intended for cemented or cementless use:
• Anatomical Shoulder Fracture Stem.
• Anatomical Shoulder Fracture Long Stem.

When used with the following glenoids the Anatomical Shoulder Combined System is intended for cemented use:
• Bigliani/Flatow Glenoid (pegged and keeled).
• Trabecular Metal™ Glenoid.

The ASHCOM Shoulder AC-Connector is a double tapered Adaptor that allows the combination of the Anatomical Shoulder Humeral Stems with the Comprehensive Trays. The male oval cone taper of the ASHCOM Shoulder AC-Connector is compatible with the cemented, uncemented and fracture humeral stems of the Anatomical Shoulder System. The female round taper is compatible with the Comprehensive Reverse Trays. In combination with compatible Zimmer Biomet reverse glenoid the implant is intended for a reverse application. The existing Anatomical Shoulder System, for which MR conditional labeling is proposed, is a modular shoulder prosthesis designed to be used in primary or revision, total or hemi shoulder arthroplasty. The existing Anatomical Shoulder Combined System, for which MR conditional labeling is proposed, allows the combination of a Bigliani/Flatow® Head with any Anatomical Shoulder Humeral Stem.

The provided text does not contain detailed acceptance criteria for a medical device or a comprehensive study demonstrating that the device meets these criteria. The document is primarily a 510(k) premarket notification for shoulder prosthetic systems (ASHCOM™ Shoulder System, Anatomical Shoulder™ System, Anatomical Shoulder™ Combined System), aiming to establish substantial equivalence to previously cleared predicate devices.

Instead, the document focuses on:

• Indications for Use: What conditions the devices are intended to treat.
• Device Description: The components and general design of the prosthetic systems.
• Comparison to Predicate Device: How the new devices are similar to existing, legally marketed devices.
• Performance Data (Nonclinical): A list of non-clinical tests performed to support safety and effectiveness, particularly for the ASHCOM Shoulder System and the MRI compatibility of the Anatomical Shoulder systems.

Here's an analysis based on the information provided, highlighting what's present and what's explicitly absent:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

The document does not provide a formal table of acceptance criteria with specific quantitative targets and corresponding device performance data to demonstrate compliance.

Instead, it lists the types of non-clinical tests performed to show safety and equivalence:

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

For the non-clinical tests listed, the document does not specify sample sizes (e.g., number of prostheses tested) or data provenance (e.g., country of origin, retrospective/prospective). These details would typically be found within the full test reports, which are not included in this summary.

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

This section is not applicable as the document describes non-clinical performance testing of physical devices (implants), not a study involving evaluation by medical experts to establish ground truth for a diagnostic or AI-driven system.

4. Adjudication method for the test set

This section is not applicable for the same reasons as 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

This section is not applicable. The device is an orthopedic implant, not an AI-assisted diagnostic or imaging device. Therefore, no MRMC study involving human readers and AI assistance was conducted or mentioned.

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

This section is not applicable. The device is an orthopedic implant and does not involve an algorithm.

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

For the non-clinical performance tests, "ground truth" would not be established by expert consensus, pathology, or outcomes data in the traditional sense. Instead, the "ground truth" or reference state is defined by engineering specifications, material properties, and regulatory standards (e.g., ASTM F2009 for taper connection testing). The tests aim to demonstrate that the physical properties and performance of the device meet these predefined engineering and safety criteria.

8. The sample size for the training set

This section is not applicable. The device is an orthopedic implant, and there is no mention of an algorithm or AI model that would require a training set.

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

This section is not applicable for the same reasons as point 8.

Summary of what the document does indicate regarding device performance and acceptance:

The submission relies on non-clinical performance testing and analysis to demonstrate the safety and effectiveness of the ASHCOM Shoulder System and the existing Anatomical Shoulder systems (for MRI compatibility labeling) and establish their substantial equivalence to predicate devices. The listed tests (FEA, cyclic fatigue, corrosion fatigue, static taper connection) are standard for orthopedic implants to assess mechanical integrity, durability, and material performance. For MRI compatibility, the evaluation followed FDA guidance, suggesting a series of tests to confirm the "MR Conditional" status.

The statement "Results of non-clinical performance testing and analyses demonstrate that the ASHCOM Shoulder System is safe and effective and substantially equivalent to the predicate devices" serves as the overall conclusion regarding acceptance based on the conducted studies, without detailing the specific quantitative acceptance criteria or results in this summary. The FDA's clearance (K170711) indicates that they found the provided non-clinical data sufficient to establish substantial equivalence.

Ask a specific question about this device