Search Results
Found 2 results
510(k) Data Aggregation
(49 days)
Mastergraft™ Matrix EXT is to be combined with autogenous bone marrow and is indicated for bony voids or gaps not intrinsic to the stability of the bony structure and can be used as a bone graft extender. The device is to be gently packed into bony voids or gaps of the skeletal system (i.e., the posterolateral spine, intervertebral disc space, pelvis, ilium, and/or extremities). These defects may be surgically created osseous defects or osseous defects created from traumatic injury to the bone. The device resorbs and is replaced with bone during the healing process. When used in intervertebral body fusion procedures, Mastergraft™ Matrix EXT must be used with an intervertebral body fusion device cleared by FDA for use with a bone void filler.
Mastergraft™ Strip is to be combined with autogenous bone marrow and is indicated for bony voids or gaps that are not intrinsic to the stability of the bony structure and can be used as a bone graft extender.
The device is to be gently packed into bony voids or gaps of the skeletal system (i.e., the posterolateral spine, intervertebral disc space, pelvis, ilium, and/or extremities). These defects may be surgically created osseous defects or osseous defects created from traumatic injury to the bone. The device resorbs and is replaced with bone during the healing process. When used in intervertebral body fusion procedures, Mastergraft™ Strip must be used with an intervertebral body fusion device cleared by FDA for use with a bone void filler.
Mastergraft™ Putty combined with either autogenous bone marrow, and/or sterile water, and/or autograft is indicated as a bone void filler for bony voids or gaps not intrinsic to the stability of the bony structure. Additionally, Mastergraft™ Putty can be used with autograft as a bone graft extender.
Mastergraft™ Putty is to be gently packed into bony voids or gaps of the skeletal system (e.g., the posterolateral spine, intervertebral disc space, pelvis, ileum, and/or extremities). These defects may be surgically created osseous defects or osseous defects created from traumatic injury to the bone. Mastergraft™ Putty resorbs and is replaced with bone during the healing process. When used in intervertebral body fusion procedures, Mastergraft™ Putty must be used with an intervertebral body fusion device cleared by FDA for use with a bone void filler.
Mastergraft™ Granules is indicated only for bony voids or gaps that are not intrinsic to the stability of the bony structure. Additionally, Mastergraff™ Granules can be used with autograft as a bone graft extender. Mastergraft™ Granules is to be gently packed into bony voids or gaps of the skeletal system (e.g., the posterolateral spine, intervertebral disc space, pelvis, ilium and/or extremities). These defects may be surgically created osseous defects created from traumatic injury to the bone. Mastergraft™ Granules provides a bone void filler that resorbs and is replaced with bone during the healing process. When used in intervertebral body fusion procedures, Mastergraft™ Granules must be used with an intervertebral body fusion device cleared by FDA for use with a bone void filler.
The Mastergraft™ Family of bone grafts in this submission includes Mastergraff™ Matrix EXT, Mastergraft™ Strip, Mastergraft™ Putty, and Mastergraft™ Granules. The devices all include osteoconductive biphasic calcium phosphate ceramic granules in different biocompatible physical forms supplied sterile for single patient use.
Mastergraft™ Matrix EXT is made from a combination of medical grade purified collagen of bovine origin and biphasic calcium phosphate ceramic. In the devices, the collagen is a highly purified (>95%) Type I bioresorbable lyophilized collagen. The biphasic ceramic portion of the device is provided in a 15 percent hydroxyapatite and 85 percent B-tricalcium phosphate formulation. Mastergraft™ Matrix EXT is supplied sterile in a premixed strip form for single patient use. Mastergrafi™ Matrix EXT is a biocompatible, osteoconductive, porous implant that allows for bony ingrowth across the graft site while resorbing at a rate consistent with bone healing. The device readily absorbs bone marrow aspirate. Mastergraft™ Matrix EXT is identical to the device cleared in K141824.
Mastergraff™ Strip is made from a combination of medical grade purified collagen of bovine origin and biphasic calcium phosphate ceramic. In the Mastergraft™ Strip device, the collagen is a highly purified (>95%) Type I bioresorbable Iyophilized collagen. The biphasic ceramic portion of the device is provided in a 15 percent hydroxyapatite and 85 percent ß-tricalcium phosphate formulation. Mastergraft™ Strip is supplied sterile in a premixed strip form for single patient use. Mastergrafi™ Strip is a biocompatible, osteoconductive, porous implant that allows for bony ingrowth across the graft site while resorbing at a rate consistent with bone healing. The device readily absorbs bone marrow aspirate and has been shown to heal bone defects. Mastergraft™ Strip is identical to the device cleared in K082166.
Mastergraff™ Putty is made from a combination of medical grade purified collagen of bovine origin and biphasic calcium phosphate ceramic. The collagen component in the Mastergraft™ Putty device is Type I bovine collagen. The biphasic ceramic portion of Mastergraft™ Putty is provided in a 15 percent hydroxyapatite and 85 percent ß-tricalcium phosphate formulation. Mastergraft™ Putty is supplied as a sterile, dry, solid, construct hydrated for single patient use and is a moldable form of bone void filler. Mastergraft™ Putty is an osteoconductive, porous implant that allows for bony ingrowth across the graft site while resorbing at a rate consistent with bone healing. Mastergraft™ Putty is biocompatible. Mastergraft™ Putty readily absorbs bone marrow aspirate and was shown to heal bone defects. Mastergraff™ Putty is identical to the device cleared in K071813.
Mastergraft™ Granules is made of medical grade combination of hydroxyapatite and ßtricalcium phosphate. MASTERGRAFT® Granules is provided in a 15 percent hydroxyapatite and 85 percent ß-tricalcium phosphate formulation. The product is supplied sterile for single patient use. MASTERGRAFT® Granules is an osteoconductive porous implant. Mastergraft™ Granules is identical to the device cleared in K082918.
The provided text is a 510(k) Premarket Notification from the FDA, which focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence of a new medical device to existing predicate devices. It does not contain information about acceptance criteria or a study that proves the device meets specific performance metrics in the context of an AI/ML medical device.
The document discusses bone void filler devices (Mastergraft™ family) and their indications for use, stating that the current submission expands their use to include intervertebral disc space. The core of the notification is to establish that these devices are substantially equivalent to previously cleared devices. This is a regulatory pathway for medical devices that does not typically involve the kind of detailed performance studies with acceptance criteria, test sets, ground truth establishment, or clinical outcome measures that would be expected for a novel AI/ML diagnostic or prognostic tool.
Therefore, I cannot fulfill your request using the provided text because it does not describe:
- Acceptance criteria for device performance (in the context of an AI/ML device).
- A study proving the device meets acceptance criteria. The document references prior clearances and robust analysis from previous studies, but it doesn't detail a new study design, methodology, or results related to specific performance metrics for the current submission.
- Details about sample sizes for test sets, data provenance, number of experts for ground truth, adjudication methods, MRMC studies, standalone performance, or training set details. These are all concepts relevant to the validation of AI/ML models, which are not discussed in this medical device submission.
The "Performance" section explicitly states: "The subject devices have been previously cleared under K141824, K082166, K071813, and K082918, which serve as Reference Devices. These submissions are leveraged to support the device's sterility, shelf-life, endotoxin, pyrogenicity, biocompatibility, and characterizations/bench performance as recommended in FDA's Class II Special Controls Guidance Document for Resorbable Calcium Salt Bone Void Filler Devices. The device's performance in intervertebral spine was supported by a robust analysis of bone grafting materials in the prior posterolateral spine fusion studies." This indicates reliance on previous data and general guidelines, not a new, specific performance study with the requested AI/ML validation metrics.
Ask a specific question about this device
(90 days)
ORTHOSS® is an implant intended to fill bony voids or gaps of the skeletal system (i.e. extremities, posterolateral spine and pelvis). ORTHOSS® can be used with autograft as a bone graft extender in a posterolateral spine fusion. These osseous defects may be surgically created or be the result of traumatic injury to the bone and are not intrinsic to the stability of the bony structure. The device resorbs and is replaced with bone during the healing process.
Orthoss® is an inorganic bone matrix, manufactured from bovine bone, with an interconnected macro- and microporous structure that supports the formation and ingrowth of new bone. Over time, Orthoss® is partially remodeled by osteoclasts (physiological remodeling). The single-use product is provided sterile (via gamma irradiation) in block (1 x 1 x 2 cm and 2 x 2 x 1.3 cm) or granular (1 - 2 mm and 2 - 4 mm) form in double-blister packs or glass vials in a blister pack, respectively.
This document discusses the 510(k) premarket notification for Orthoss®, a resorbable calcium salt bone void filler. It describes the device, its indications for use, comparison to a predicate device, and performance data provided to support its substantial equivalence.
Here's an analysis to extract the requested information:
Analysis of the document for Acceptance Criteria and Study Details:
The document describes a medical device (Orthoss®), not an AI/software device. Therefore, the questions related to AI performance metrics (e.g., human reader improvement with AI, standalone AI performance, training set details, expert ground truth establishment for AI) are not applicable to this submission.
The "acceptance criteria" for this device are primarily demonstrated through substantially equivalent (SE) determination to a predicate device, supported by performance data demonstrating safety and effectiveness. The "study that proves the device meets the acceptance criteria" refers to the non-clinical performance studies, particularly an animal study for an extended indication.
1. A table of acceptance criteria and the reported device performance:
Since this is not an AI device, there isn't a table of statistical performance metrics like sensitivity/specificity for disease detection. Instead, "acceptance criteria" are implied by the demonstration of substantial equivalence across various aspects.
Acceptance Criteria (Implied for SE) | Reported Device Performance |
---|---|
Material Characteristics, Manufacturing, Sterilization, Packaging, Size: Similar to predicate device. | The subject device is similar to the predicate device with respect to materials characteristics, manufacturing and sterilization methods, packaging, and size. Both the subject and predicate device have identical final product specifications. (Page 4) Minor changes (vial cap, manufacturing processes, raw material supplier, filling volume, packaging) did not raise different questions of safety and effectiveness. (Page 4) |
Safety: Biocompatibility, non-pyrogenic, endotoxin levels. | Biocompatibility per ISO 10993-1:2018 (Page 4) Pyrogenicity per USP and endotoxin per USP (Page 4) |
Shelf-life stability: Demonstrated stability over time. | Shelf-life studies per ICH Q1A (R2) (Page 4) |
Performance for Extended Indication (Autograft Extender): Similar performance to predicate and positive control in bone healing, resorption, and fusion. | Animal Study Results (Boden Rabbit Spinal Fusion Model): (Page 5) - Radiographic Appearance: Subject and predicate device performed similarly. - Micro-computed Tomography: Subject and predicate device performed similarly; evidence of new bone formation, resorption, and remodeling observed. - Histology: Normal patterns of bone healing in test group, similar to predicate group and positive control (autograft). New bone formation and bone remodeling occurred over time. Presence of some inflammatory cells as devices degraded. - Manual Palpation: No differences in distribution of findings between subject and predicate groups. - Multidirectional Flexibility: Similar for subject and predicate devices. - Adverse Events: No adverse events or device-related failures noted during harvesting. - Positive Control: Performance consistent with published data/study site experience. |
Sterilization Assurance: Validated sterilization process. | Sterilization validation per ISO 11137-1:2006, ISO 11137-2:2013, and ISO 11137-3:2017 (Page 4) |
Packaging Integrity: Validated packaging. | Packaging validation per ISO 11607-1:2009/ Amd 2014 and ISO 11607-2:2006/ Amd 2014 (Page 4) |
Material Characterization: Chemical and structural properties confirmed. | X-ray, Fourier Transform Infrared, and HG-Pressure Porosimetry analysis (Page 4) |
2. Sample size used for the test set and the data provenance:
- Test Set Description: The "test set" here refers to the animal study conducted to support the extended indication.
- Sample Size: The document states "Rabbits were randomized to receive Orthoss®, MASTERGRAFT® Resorbable Ceramic Granules, or autograft control." (Page 5). It does not specify the exact number of rabbits in each group or overall.
- Data Provenance: The study used a "validated Boden rabbit spinal fusion model." (Page 5). This is a prospective animal study. The country of origin of the data is not explicitly stated but implies a controlled laboratory setting.
3. Number of experts used to establish the ground truth for the test set and the qualifications of those experts:
- This question is Not Applicable in the context of this device. The ground truth for the animal study (bone healing, fusion, etc.) was established through direct observation, radiographic analysis, micro-computed tomography, and histological analysis of the animal tissue, not by human expert readers interpreting images for disease diagnosis. The evaluation was primarily objective measurements and pathological assessment.
4. Adjudication method (e.g. 2+1, 3+1, none) for the test set:
- Not Applicable. As this is an animal study involving direct biological and imaging measurements (radiographs, micro-CT, histology, manual palpation), there is no mention of "adjudication" in the sense of multiple human readers resolving disagreements on interpretations. The results were based on direct observation and analysis by the researchers and pathologists involved in the study.
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 a medical device (bone void filler), not an AI-assisted diagnostic tool.
6. If a standalone (i.e. algorithm only without human-in-the-loop performance) was done:
- Not Applicable. This is a physical medical device, not an algorithm.
7. The type of ground truth used (expert consensus, pathology, outcomes data, etc.):
- For the animal study: The ground truth was established through a combination of:
- Radiographic appearance (direct imaging evidence)
- Micro-computed tomography (detailed 3D imaging of bone structure)
- Histology (microscopic examination of tissue, considered the gold standard for bone formation and remodeling)
- Manual palpation (a physical assessment of fusion rigor)
- Multidirectional flexibility measurements of the spine.
8. The sample size for the training set:
- Not Applicable. This is not an AI/machine learning device that requires a "training set."
9. How the ground truth for the training set was established:
- Not Applicable. No training set was involved.
Ask a specific question about this device
Page 1 of 1