Search Results

The Siemens Acuson X300 ultrasound imaging system is intended for the following applications: General Radiology, Fetal, Abdominal, Intraoperative, Pediatric, Small Parts, Neonatal/Adult Cephalic, Cardiac, Transesophageal, Pelvic, Transcranial, OB/GYN, Urology, Vascular, Musculoskeletal, Superficial Musculoskeletal, and Peripheral Vascular applications. The system also provides for the measurement of anatomical structures and for analysis packages that provide information that is used for clinical diagnosis purposes. The Arterial Health Package (AHP) software provides the physician with the capability to measure Intima Media Thickness and the option to reference normative tables that have been validated in peer-reviewed studies. The information is intended to provide the physician with an easily understood tool for communicating with patients regarding state of their cardiovascular system. This feature should be utilized according to the "ASE Consensus Statement; Use of Carotid Ultrasound to Identify Subclinical Vascular Disease and Evaluate Cardiovascular Disease Risk: A Consensus Statement from the American Association of Echocardiography; Carotid Intima-Media Thickness Task Force, Endorsed by the Society for Vascular Imaging". The Acuson Acunav and Soundstar Ultrsound Catheter are intended for intra-cardiac and intra-luminal visualization of cardiac and great vessel anatomy and physiology, as well as visualization of other devices in the heart of adult and pediatric patients.

The SC2000 ultrasound imaging system is intended for the following applications: Cardiac, Neo-natal and Fetal Cardiac, Pediatric, Transespohageal, Adult Cephalic, Peripheral Vessel, Abdominal Intraoperative, Intraoperative, Musculo-skeletal Conventional, and Musculo-skeletal Superficial applications. The system also provides the ability to measure anatomical structures and calculation packages that provide information to the clinician that may be used adjunctively with other medical data obtained by a physician for clinical diagnosis purposes. The typical examinations performed using the SC2000 Ultrasound System are: Cardiac Imaging Applications and Analysis, Vascular Imaging Applications and Analysis, Superficial Imaging Applications, Intraoperative Imaging Applications, Transcranial Imaging Applications. The Acuson Acunav and Soundstar Ultrsound Catheter are intended for intra-cardiac and intraluminal visualization of cardiac and great vessel anatomy and physiology, as well as visualization of other devices in the heart of adult and pediatric patients.

The Diagnostic Ultrasound Systems are multi-purpose mobile, software controlled diagnostic ultrasound systems with on-screen display for thermal and mechanical indices related to potential bio-effect mechanisms. Its function is to acquire primary or secondary harmonic ultrasound echo data and display it in B-Mode, Pulsed (PW) Doppler Mode, Continuous (CW) Doppler Mode, Color Doppler Mode, Amplitude Doppler Mode, a combination of modes, 3D Imaging, or Harmonic Imaging and 4D imaging.

Here's a summary of the acceptance criteria and study information based on the provided text, focusing on the request details:

Acceptance Criteria and Device Performance

The document describes the Siemens SC2000/X300 Diagnostic Ultrasound System and its various transducers. The acceptance criteria essentially focus on demonstrating substantial equivalence to previously cleared devices. The "reported device performance" is implicitly that the device performs equivalently to the predicate devices and meets safety and performance standards.

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

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

The document explicitly states: "Since the modified devices use the same technology and principles as existing devices, clinical data is not required." This indicates that no clinical test set with human patients was used specifically for this 510(k) submission. The evaluation was based on nonclinical tests and comparison to predicate devices. Therefore, there is no sample size, country of origin, or information on retrospective/prospective data for a clinical test set.

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

As there was no clinical test set for this 510(k) submission, there is no mention of experts used to establish ground truth for a test set. The review focused on engineering and performance standards, and comparison to previously cleared devices.

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

Not applicable, as no clinical test set was used.

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. The document describes a diagnostic ultrasound system and its transducers, not an AI-assisted diagnostic tool. No MRMC study or AI performance evaluation is mentioned.

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

Not applicable. This device is a diagnostic ultrasound system, not a standalone algorithm.

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

For the nonclinical tests conducted, the "ground truth" would be established by the specifications and performance metrics outlined in the various referenced safety and performance standards (e.g., UL 60601-1, IEC 60601-2-37, etc.). For the substantial equivalence claim, the ground truth is the performance and safety profiles of the predicate devices.

8. The sample size for the training set

Not applicable, as this is a traditional diagnostic ultrasound system, not an AI/ML-based device requiring a training set.

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

Not applicable, as no training set was used.

Ask a specific question about this device

The SC2000 ultrasound imaging system is intended for the following applications: Cardiac, Neo-natal and Fetal Cardiac, Pediatric, Transespohageal, Adult Cephalic, Peripheral Vessel, Abdominal, Intraoperative Abdominal, Intraoperative Neurological, Musculo-skeletal Conventional, and Musculo-skeletal Superficial applications. The system also provides the ability to measure anatomical structures and calculation packages that provide information to the clinician that may be used adjunctively with other medical data obtained by a physician for clinical diagnosis purposes. The typical examinations performed using the SC2000 Ultrasound System are: Cardiac Imaging Applications and Analysis, Vascular Imaging Applications and Analysis, Superficial Imaging Applications, Intraoperative Imaging Applications, Transcranial Imaging Applications.

The Acuson SC2000™ has been designed to meet the following product safety standards: UL 60601-1, Safety Requirements for Medical Equipment; IEC 60601-2-37 Diagnostic Ultrasound Safety Standards; CSA C22.2 No. 601-1, Safety Requirements for Medical Equipment; AIUM/NEMA UD-3. Standard for Real Time Display of Thermal and Mechanical Acoustic Output Indices on Diagnostic Ultrasound Equipment; AIUM/NEMA UD-2, Acoustic Output Measurement Standard for Diagnostic Ultrasound; Safety and EMC Requirements for Medical Equipment; IEC 60601-1; IEC 60601-1-1; IEC 60601-1-2; IEC 1157 Declaration of Acoustic Power; ISO 10993-1 Biocompatibility.

This 510(k) summary for the ACUSON SC2000 Diagnostic Ultrasound System is a Special 510(k), indicating a minor change to a previously cleared device. Therefore, a comprehensive de novo clinical study demonstrating performance against acceptance criteria for a novel device is not part of this submission. Instead, the performance data section explicitly states: "No performance data required to support this modification, as there is no change to any hardware or software, or method of use."

The submission focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence to a previously cleared device (K123622) by only renaming three transducers. As such, the typical elements of a study proving a device meets acceptance criteria (like a test set, ground truth, experts, and statistical results) are not provided in this document.

However, I can extract the acceptance criteria implied by this type of submission, which is the determination of substantial equivalence to the predicate device for the specified indications for use.

Here's a breakdown based on the provided document:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

Acceptance Criteria (Implied for a Special 510(k) for Renaming Transducers): The modified device, specifically the renamed transducers, must demonstrate substantial equivalence to the previously cleared predicate device concerning intended use and technological characteristics, with no changes to hardware, software, or method of use.

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

• Sample Size for Test Set: Not applicable. No new performance testing with a specific test set was conducted for this Special 510(k) given the nature of the modification (renaming transducers).
• Data Provenance: Not applicable. No new data was generated or analyzed for this submission. The basis for substantial equivalence relies on the established performance of the predicate device and the claim that the changes are confined to nomenclature.

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

• Number of Experts: Not applicable. No new ground truth establishment was required as no new performance data was generated.
• Qualifications of Experts: Not applicable.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set

• Adjudication Method: Not applicable.

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

• MRMC Study: No. This submission does not describe an MRMC comparative effectiveness study.
• Effect Size of Human Readers Improvement: Not applicable.

6. If a Standalone (Algorithm Only Without Human-in-the-Loop Performance) Was Done

• Standalone Performance: Not applicable. This device is an ultrasound imaging system, not an AI algorithm requiring standalone performance evaluation in the context of this submission.
• The document states there is "no change to any hardware or software," implying no new algorithms or software features are being introduced that would require such testing.

7. The Type of Ground Truth Used

• Type of Ground Truth: Not applicable for new performance evaluation. The "ground truth" for this Special 510(k) is implicitly the established safety and effectiveness of the predicate device (K123622), to which the modified device (with renamed transducers) is claimed to be substantially equivalent without any functional changes.

8. The Sample Size for the Training Set

• Sample Size for Training Set: Not applicable. This document does not describe the development or training of any new algorithms or software components.

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

• Ground Truth Establishment for Training Set: Not applicable.

Ask a specific question about this device

The SC2000 ultrasound imaging system is intended for the following applications: Cardiac, Neo-natal and Fetal Cardiac, Pediatric, Transespohageal, Adult Cephalic, Peripheral Vessel, Intrcperative Neurological, Musculo-skeletal Conventional, and Musculo-skeletal Superficial applications. The system also provides the ability to measure anatomical structures and calculation packages that provide information to the clinician that may be used adjunctively with other medical data obtained by a physician for clinical diagnosis purposes. The typical examinations performed using the SC2000 Ultrasound System are: Cardiac Imaging Applications and Analysis, Vascular Imaging Applications and Analysis, Superficial Imaging Applications, Intraoperative Imaging Applications, Transcranial Imaging Applications.

The SC2000™ Diagnostic Ultrasound System is a multi-purpose mobile, software controlled diagnostic ultrasound system with an on-screen display for themical indices related to potential bio-effect mechanisms. Its function is to acquire primary of Secondary harmonic ultrasound echo data and display it in B-Mode, Pulsed (PW) Dopler Mode, a combination Continuous (CW) Doppler Mode, Color Dopen Mode, Ampling on a France, Nissalay of modes, 3D Imaging, or Harmonic Imaging and 4D imaging on a Flat Panel Display. The SC2000™Ultrasound System has been optimized for user ergonomics with adjustable keyboard height and rotation and independently adjustable Flat P available off-line workstation (SC2000WP).

Here's an analysis of the provided 510(k) summary regarding the Acuson SC2000™ Diagnostic Ultrasound System, focusing on acceptance criteria and study details.

Important Note: The provided document is a 510(k) Summary, which typically focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence to a legally marketed predicate device rather than presenting detailed standalone performance studies with specific acceptance criteria and outcome metrics in the way a clinical trial for a new therapeutic device might. The "performance data" section in this type of submission generally refers to engineering verification and validation against internal specifications and relevant safety standards, rather than direct clinical performance in terms of diagnostic accuracy against a ground truth in a clinical setting.

Therefore, the answers below will reflect the information available in this type of regulatory document. Many of the requested details (like sample size for test sets, number of experts for ground truth, adjudication methods, MRMC studies, effect size, and training set information) are explicitly not present in a standard 510(k) premarket notification for an ultrasound system, as this is a device modification submission focusing on safety and technological equivalence.

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

As this is a 510(k) for a modification to an existing device, the "acceptance criteria" are primarily based on established safety and performance standards for diagnostic ultrasound systems, and the "reported device performance" is the device's demonstrated compliance with these standards and verification of its specifications.

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

The document does not specify a "test set" in the context of clinical performance evaluation (e.g., patient data for diagnostic accuracy). The performance data cited refers to engineering and safety testing. Therefore, there is no information provided regarding sample size for a clinical test set or data provenance (e.g., country of origin, retrospective/prospective clinical data).

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

Not applicable/Not provided. As stated above, this submission focuses on technical safety and performance validation against standards, not a clinical study requiring expert-established ground truth for diagnostic accuracy.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set

Not applicable/Not provided. No clinical test set or adjudication method is mentioned in the document.

5. If a Multi-Reader Multi-Case (MRMC) Comparative Effectiveness Study was done, and its effect size

No. The document does not mention any MRMC comparative effectiveness study, nor does it provide information on a human readers' improvement with or without AI assistance. This type of study is not common for 510(k) submissions of basic ultrasound system modifications.

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

No. The SC2000™ is a diagnostic ultrasound system, an imaging device operated by a human. It is not an AI algorithm intended for standalone diagnostic performance. The document describes the system's ability to acquire and display ultrasound data, and its "calculation packages" provide information to the clinician for diagnosis, implying human interpretation is always in the loop.

7. The Type of Ground Truth Used

For the safety and performance testing described, the "ground truth" is defined by the technical specifications for the device and the objective criteria outlined in the various international and national safety and performance standards (e.g., acoustic output measurements, electrical safety limits, biocompatibility standards). This is engineering and regulatory compliance ground truth, not clinical ground truth (like pathology results or patient outcomes) for diagnostic accuracy.

8. The Sample Size for the Training Set

Not applicable/Not provided. This submission describes an ultrasound imaging system, not a machine learning model that requires a training set.

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

Not applicable/Not provided. As there is no mention of a machine learning model or training set, the establishment of ground truth for such a set is not relevant to this submission.

Ask a specific question about this device

The Biosense Webster SOUNDSTAR® eco Diagnostic Ultrasound Catheter and related accessory devices are indicated for intra-cardiac and intra-luminal visualization of cardiac and great vessel anatomy and physiology as well as visualization of other devices in the heart. When used with compatible CARTO® 3 EP Navigation Systems, the SOUNDSTAR® eco Catheter provides location information. Please refer to the Compatibility Matrix Insert for Compatible CARTO® 3 Systems as each catheter is compatible with a specific version of CARTO® 3 and is not backwards compatible with previous versions of CARTO® 3 EP Navigation Systems.

The modified SOUNDSTAR eco10F and SOUNDSTAR eco10FG Catheters are both 90 cm 10F IntraCardiac Echo (ICE) Catheters with an acoustic arrav identical to the currently cleared SNDSTR10 and SNDSTR10G Catheters. The catheters have a magnetic location sensor (providing location information to the CARTO 3 Navigation System Version 2.2) and an ultrasound transducer (acquiring real time ultrasound images) embedded in the tip. The modified SOUNDSTAR eco Catheters have a bifurcated 'tail' originating from their handle which is nearly identical to the bifurcated tail of the predicate devices. One leg terminates in the SOUNDSTAR Flex Tab connector, which connects via the appropriate SwiftLink cable to the corresponding Ultrasound system. For the SOUNDSTAR eco10F Catheter the SwiftLink cable connects to Acuson Cypress, Acuson Sequoia or Acuson X300 Ultrasound systems. For the SOUNDSTAR eco10FG Catheter the SwifLink cable connects to GE Vivid-i or Vivid-q Ultrasound systems. Both versions of SOUNDSTAR eco10F and SOUNDSTAR eco10FG Catheters are based on the existing SOUNDSTAR 3D 10F (SNDSTR10) and SOUNDSTAR 3D 10FG (SNDSTR10G) catheters and have the same intended use and clinical applications. The predicate and modified catheters share the majority of components and manufacturing process as explained previously. The modified SOUNDSTAR eco10F and SOUNDSTAR eco10FG Catheters, when connected to the corresponding Ultrasound Systems, will provide real-time integration of ultrasound images with CARTO 3 Version 2.2 electromagnetic acquired maps.

The provided text is a 510(k) summary for the SOUNDSTAR® eco DIAGNOSTIC ULTRASOUND CATHETER. It primarily focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence to predicate devices and detailing modifications.

Based on the provided document, here's an analysis of the requested information:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

The acceptance criteria are not explicitly stated in terms of diagnostic performance metrics like sensitivity, specificity, or accuracy for the "device" as an AI/CAD system. Instead, the focus is on transducer surface temperature to ensure patient safety, as required by IEC 60601-2-37.

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

The document describes physical testing of the catheter's transducer surface temperature, not a clinical study involving human patients or a test set of data in the context of an AI/CAD system. Therefore, the concepts of "sample size for test set" and "data provenance" (country of origin, retrospective/prospective) are not applicable in the way they would be for an AI/CAD diagnostic device. The testing was conducted in a lab environment using "tissue mimicking material" (TMM).

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

Not applicable. This device is an ultrasound catheter, not an AI/CAD system requiring expert ground truth for image interpretation. The "ground truth" here is the physical temperature measurement.

4. Adjudication method for the test set

Not applicable. The reported performance is a direct physical measurement (temperature), not an interpretation that requires adjudication.

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/CAD device.

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

Not applicable. This is not an AI/CAD device.

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

The "ground truth" for the performance described is the measured surface temperature of the transducer in tissue mimicking material (TMM), conducted in accordance with IEC 60601-2-37 requirements. This is a physical, objective measurement of a safety-related parameter.

8. The sample size for the training set

Not applicable. This device is not an AI/CAD system and does not involve machine learning training data.

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

Not applicable. This device is not an AI/CAD system and does not involve machine learning training data.

Ask a specific question about this device

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 Biosense Webster SOUNDSTAR 3D Diagnostic Ultrasound Catheter and related accessory devices are indicated for intra-cardiac and intra-luminal visualization of cardiac and great vessel anatomy and physiology as well as visualization of other devices in the heart. When used with the CARTO XP EP Navigation System, Version 9.7 or greater, the SOUNDSTAR 3D Catheter provides location information.

The modified Biosense Webster SOUNDSTAR Catheter is a 90 cm 10F IntraCardiac Echo (ICE) Catheter with an acoustic array identical to the currently cleared Biosense Webster SOUNDSTAR Catheter and the ACUSON ACUNAV 10F Diagnostic Ultrasound Catheter. The modified SOUNDSTAR Catheter has a location sensor (providing location information to CARTO XP EP Navigation System, Version 9.7 or greater) and an ultrasound transducer (acquiring real time ultrasound images) embedded in the tip. The modified SOUNDSTAR Catheter has a bifurcated 'tail' originating from its handle. One leg terminates in the SOUNDSTAR Flex Tab connector, which connects via a SwiftLink cable to the GE Vivid-i or Vivid-q Ultrasound System. The other leg terminates in the CARTO Hypertronic connector, which connects via a Patient Interface Unit (PIU) extension cable to the CARTO Navigation System. The modified SOUNDSTAR Catheter, when connected to the CARTO XP EP Navigation System, Version 9.7 or greater, and the GE Vivid-i or Vivid-q Ultrasound Systems, will provide real-time integration of ultrasound images with CARTO electromagnetic acquired maps.

This document is a Special 510(k) Premarket Notification for the SoundStar 3D Ultrasound Catheter, specifically for its use with GE Vivid-i/q Ultrasound Systems. The primary purpose of this submission is to demonstrate substantial equivalence to previously cleared devices the SoundStar 3D Ultrasound Catheter (K070242) and the ACUSON ACUNAV 10F Diagnostic Ultrasound Catheter (K071234), following modifications that primarily involve software compatibility and labeling changes.

Summary of Acceptance Criteria and Device Performance:

The provided document describes modifications to an existing device rather than a new device requiring extensive performance testing against novel acceptance criteria. The acceptance criteria in this context relate to ensuring the modified device maintains its established performance and is compatible with the new ultrasound systems.

Detailed Study Information:

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

   • The document does not specify a sample size for a test set in the traditional sense of a clinical or analytical performance study with patient data. The testing performed was primarily non-clinical compatibility testing.
   • The provenance of any data (e.g., country of origin, retrospective/prospective) is not mentioned because the testing described appears to be bench/engineering testing rather than human subject or animal study data.

2. 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):

   • This information is not applicable to the type of testing described in this 510(k) submission. The "ground truth" for compatibility testing would be the pre-determined specifications and functional requirements of the interconnected systems, as evaluated by engineers and technical personnel rather than clinical experts establishing a ground truth for diagnostic accuracy.

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

   • This information is not applicable. Adjudication methods are typically used in clinical studies where expert consensus is needed to resolve discrepancies in diagnoses or interpretations. The testing here focuses on technical compatibility and functional verification.

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, a multi-reader multi-case (MRMC) comparative effectiveness study was not done. This submission is for an ultrasound catheter and its compatibility with new imaging systems, not for an AI-assisted diagnostic tool. Therefore, the effect size of human readers improving with or without AI assistance is irrelevant and not reported.

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

   • No, a standalone algorithm performance study was not done. This device is a medical instrument (ultrasound catheter) and its associated system, which inherently involves human operation and interpretation. It is not an AI algorithm meant to function independently.

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

   • The "ground truth" for the non-clinical tests conducted was the pre-determined specifications and functional requirements for the SOUNDSTAR Catheter itself, the GE Vivid-i and Vivid-q Ultrasound Systems, and the CARTO System. The goal was to confirm that the modified device, when integrated, met these established technical and performance requirements.

7. The sample size for the training set:

   • The document does not mention a training set. This is a 510(k) for a hardware device modification, not a machine learning or AI algorithm development. Therefore, the concept of a training set is not applicable.

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

   • As there is no mention of a training set, the establishment of ground truth for such a set is not applicable or discussed in this submission.

Ask a specific question about this device