Search Filters

Search Results

Found 1 results

510(k) Data Aggregation

    K Number
    K151723
    Device Name
    Rainbow Trans
    Manufacturer
    Date Cleared
    2015-10-28

    (124 days)

    Product Code
    Regulation Number
    872.6660
    Panel
    Dental
    Reference & Predicate Devices
    Predicate For
    N/A
    Why did this record match?
    Reference Devices :

    K093560

    AI/MLSaMDIVD (In Vitro Diagnostic)TherapeuticDiagnosticis PCCP AuthorizedThirdpartyExpeditedreview
    Intended Use

    rainbow™ Trans is used in the manufacture of a dental core.

    Device Description

    rainbow™ Trans is a partially sintered dental ceramic made out of colored ZrO2(Y-TZP). rainbow™ Trans is milled into cores of artificial teeth and then is finally sintered in a furnace to harden the ZrO2. Then, the core is layered with porcelain to make a finished tooth.

    AI/ML Overview

    The provided document describes the predicate device and the new device (rainbow™ Trans) being submitted for 510(k) premarket notification. The study provided is a comparison of technical characteristics and performance data against established standards, rather than a clinical study involving human subjects or AI performance. Therefore, many of the requested categories (sample size for test set, number of experts, adjudication method, MRMC comparative effectiveness, standalone performance, training set details) are not applicable or cannot be extracted from this type of regulatory submission.

    However, I can extract the acceptance criteria and reported device performance from the "Performance Data" section.

    1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

    No.ItemAcceptance CriteriaReported Device PerformanceStandard
    Biocompatibility Testing
    1CytotoxicityNone cytotoxicityNone cytotoxicityISO 10993-5
    2Sensitization (Local Lymph Node Assay)None sensitizationNone sensitizationISO 10993-10
    3Oral mucosa irritationLess than stimulus thresholdMinimal irritationISO 10993-10
    4Acute systemic toxicityNone acute Systemic toxicityNone acute Systemic toxicityISO 10993-11
    5GenotoxicityNone genotoxicityNone genotoxicityISO 10993-3
    Performance Bench Testing
    1VisualNo impurities and No specific changesNo impurities and No specific changesISO 6872
    2SizeSize error of; Standard Size < ±5%Size error of; Standard Size < ±5%ISO 6872
    3PackageNo damageNo damageISO 6872
    4UniformityUniformUniformISO 6872
    5Freedom from extraneous materialsNot Freedom from extraneous materials (This appears to be a typo in the document; it likely means "Freedom from extraneous materials" with a positive outcome)Not Freedom from extraneous materials (Assuming this also refers to a positive outcome in context)ISO 6872
    6Radioactivity238U Less than 1.0 Bq/g238U: < 0.000124 Bq/g, 226Ra: < 0.010 Bq/gISO 6872
    7Chemical solubilityLess than 100 µg/cm²Solubility: 9 µg/cm²ISO 6872
    8Flexural strengthMore than 800 MPaAverage: 902 MPaISO 6872
    9Linear thermal expansion10.8 (±0.5) x 10⁻⁶ K⁻¹Average: 10.8 x 10⁻⁶ K⁻¹ISO 6872
    10Shipping TestResult: PassPassISTA2011 Integrity Test 3A

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

    • Sample Size: Not explicitly stated for each test. The document mentions "Biocompatibility testing on the proposed rainbow™ Trans has been completed" and "The proposed rainbow™ Trans was evaluated using the following performance bench testing." Typically, these types of tests involve a statistically sufficient number of samples as determined by the specific ISO standards, but the exact count is not given.
    • Data Provenance: The tests were conducted by GENOSS Co., Ltd. (based in Gyeonggi-do, Korea). The data is from laboratory bench testing rather than clinical data from a specific country or patient population; therefore, it is prospective in the sense that the tests were performed for this submission.

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

    • Not applicable as this involves laboratory bench testing and biocompatibility assessments against quantitative standards, not expert interpretation of clinical cases.

    4. Adjudication method for the test set:

    • Not applicable. The tests are against predefined quantitative criteria from ISO standards.

    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 a study of an AI or diagnostic device that involves human readers.

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

    • Not applicable. This is not an algorithm or AI device.

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

    • Ground Truth: Quantitative and qualitative specifications defined by internationally recognized consensus standards, specifically ISO 10993 series for biocompatibility and ISO 6872 for dental ceramics. The "ground truth" for the shipping test was the ISTA2011 Integrity Test 3A.

    8. The sample size for the training set:

    • Not applicable. This is not a machine learning or AI device that requires a training set.

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

    • Not applicable.
    Ask a Question

    Ask a specific question about this device

    Page 1 of 1