Search Results

The devices are used for temporary grasping and clamping of soft tissue and small tubular structures during minimally invasive procedures.

The MINI-TONG instruments are minimally invasive devices. Prior to insertion, the physician must depress the safety button and retract the instrument into the needle is inserted through the soft tissue under visualization. Once the needle has penetrated the soft tissue, the physician will advance the instrument into the body cavity using the handle. As the instrument advances, the instrument will open. The device includes a self-activating safety that prohibits the jaws from returning to their fully retracted position while in use. The devices are sterile disposable, single patient only. The devices were designed to hold pneumoperitoneum during use.

The provided FDA 510(k) summary for the "MINI-TONG" device primarily focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence to predicate devices based on technological characteristics and intended use. It does not present a detailed study with acceptance criteria and reported device performance metrics in the way that would typically be seen for a new, complex diagnostic or therapeutic device requiring extensive performance testing.

The document states: "We believe the addition of this new jaw configuration is a minor expansion to a product family that already has 510(k) clearance. The subject device is composed of biocompatible materials and the sterilization process has been validated." This suggests that the primary "study" or justification for equivalence relied on the established performance of existing predicate devices and basic material/sterilization validation.

Therefore, many of the requested details about acceptance criteria, detailed study design, sample sizes, ground truth establishment, expert involvement, and MRMC studies are not present in this submission.

Here's a breakdown of what can be extracted and what is explicitly not available based on the provided text:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

Missing Information: Specific quantitative acceptance criteria (e.g., minimum grasping force, maximum tissue damage, durability under specific loads) and detailed performance data (e.g., actual measured grasping force, results of biocompatibility tests, sterilization validation reports) are not provided in this summary.

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

• No specific "test set" sample size for functional performance is mentioned in the provided text.
• No details on data provenance (e.g., country of origin, retrospective/prospective) related to a performance study are provided. The justification for equivalence relies on the known performance of predicate devices.

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

• Not applicable as no specific test set requiring expert-established ground truth is described in this submission. The "ground truth" for substantial equivalence appears to be based on the established safety and effectiveness of the predicate devices and the technological similarity.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set

• Not applicable as no specific test set requiring adjudication is described.

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

• No MRMC comparative effectiveness study was mentioned or implied. This type of study is typically for diagnostic devices or devices where human-AI interaction is central to the performance. The MINI-TONG is an instrument, not a diagnostic tool.

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

• Not applicable. The MINI-TONG is a manual surgical instrument, not an algorithm, so independent algorithmic performance is not relevant. Its performance is always human-in-the-loop.

7. Type of Ground Truth Used

• For the purpose of substantial equivalence, the "ground truth" implicitly relies on:
  • Predicate Device Performance: The established safety and effectiveness of the legally marketed predicate devices (Mini Lap Instruments - K070686, U.S. Surgical Modified Hand Instrument Devices K960748, Solos Endoscopy 10mm Atraumatic Grasping Forcep and 5mm Grasping Forcep K900948 / K900958).
  • Design & Material Standards: Compliance with biocompatibility standards and validated sterilization processes.
  • Functional Description: The device's described ability to perform its intended function of grasping and clamping.

8. Sample Size for the Training Set

• Not applicable. As a physical instrument, there is no "training set" in the context of an AI/ML algorithm. The design and validation are based on engineering principles and testing appropriate for a mechanical device.

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

• Not applicable, as there is no "training set." The performance characteristics are derived from engineering design, material selection, manufacturing processes, and comparison to predicate devices, rather than machine learning training.

Summary Caveat: This analysis is strictly based on the provided text, which is an FDA 510(k) summary. Such summaries are often high-level and refer to more detailed internal documentation (e.g., test reports for biocompatibility, sterilization validation, mechanical testing) that would contain the specific acceptance criteria and detailed performance data. This document's primary purpose is to articulate the basis for claiming substantial equivalence, not to fully detail all underlying engineering and performance tests.

Ask a specific question about this device