Search Results

To stimulate peripheral nerves for relief of chronic intractable, post traumatic and post-surgical pain for patients 18 years or older

The MagVenture Pain Therapy is a magnetic stimulator system that provides brief and focused magnetic pulses in order to non-invasively stimulate peripheral nerves and provide relief of chronic intractable, post-traumatic and post-surgical pain. The subject device is intended to be used in hospitals and clinics such as pain management clinics. The device consists of Magnetic Stimulator, Stimulation Coils, Liquid Cool Unit (optional), and a Trolley. All coils of the MagVenture Pain Therapy have a built-in thermo sensor to measure the temperature of the coil surfaces to prevent high temperature on the skin of the patient or operator. The temperature allowed by the system is maximum 43°C or between 44°C for less than 10 minutes. The system will automatically disable if this maximum temperature is reached.

The provided document is a 510(k) Premarket Notification for the MagVenture Pain Therapy device. This type of submission relies on demonstrating substantial equivalence to a legally marketed predicate device, rather than requiring new clinical trials to prove safety and effectiveness. Therefore, the information regarding specific acceptance criteria and a study proving those criteria are not directly presented in the format requested for a device with novel claims.

However, based on the document, we can infer acceptance criteria from the comparison to the predicate device and the discussion of technological characteristics. The study proving the device meets these inferred criteria is essentially a comparison study against the predicate device and an assessment of why any differences do not raise new questions of safety or effectiveness.

Here's an attempt to answer your questions based on the provided text, recognizing the limitations of a 510(k) submission:

1. A table of acceptance criteria and the reported device performance

The "acceptance criteria" for a 510(k) are typically that the new device is "substantially equivalent" to a predicate device, meaning it has the same intended use and either has the same technological characteristics or, if it has different technological characteristics, those do not raise different questions of safety and effectiveness. The performance is reported by comparing it to the predicate.

The "study" demonstrating these criteria are met is the comparison presented in the 510(k) submission, specifically the "Comparison of Technological Characteristics" table and the "Substantial Equivalence Notes" which explain why differences do not raise new safety or effectiveness questions.

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

The document does not describe a clinical "test set" in the traditional sense of a clinical trial. Instead, the "testing" references non-clinical testing performed on the predicate device (K094019) and the argument that the current device is "identical in all features (e.g., design, dimensions, materials, biocompatibility), except for the indications for use." Therefore, "no new bench testing is needed."

This implies that the "data provenance" for the foundational performance characteristics comes from the testing previously conducted for the predicate devices (MagPro Family device K094019 and Axon Therapy K210021), not a new test set 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. This is a 510(k) submission based on substantial equivalence, not a de novo clinical study with a new "test set" requiring expert ground truth establishment. The ground truth for safety and effectiveness is established by the prior clearance of the predicate device.

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

Not applicable. As above, there is no new clinical "test set" with 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 device is a Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulator for Pain Relief, not an AI-assisted diagnostic or imaging device. Therefore, MRMC studies and AI assistance are not relevant to this submission.

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

Not applicable. This is a physical medical device (magnetic stimulator), not an algorithm or AI system. Its performance is intrinsic to the device's physical operation, not an algorithm's output.

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

The ground truth for the safety and effectiveness of the device's underlying technology and performance characteristics is established through:

• Prior FDA clearances: The substantial equivalence relies on the fact that the predicate devices (MagPro Family and Axon Therapy) were previously cleared by the FDA based on their demonstrated safety and effectiveness.
• Compliance with recognized standards: The document explicitly states compliance with standards like IEC60601-1 v3.1 (electrical, mechanical, chemical, thermal safety) and ISO 10993 (biocompatibility). These standards represent established "ground truths" for various aspects of device safety.
• Physiological understanding: The justification for wider pulse frequencies and repetition rates refers to the "range of physiological action potentials (from 0.05 to 500 Hz) of the human nervous system," indicating an appeal to established physiological knowledge as a "ground truth" for safety.

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 specific question about this device

The Chocolate PTA Balloon Catheter is intended for balloon dilatation of lesions in the peripheral vasculature, including the iliac, femoral, popliteal, infra-popliteal, and renal arteries. NOT for use in the coronary or cerebral vasculature.

The Chocolate PTA Balloon Catheter is a standard balloon dilatation catheter with a braided shaft and an atraumatic, tapered and beveled tip. The device is compatible with commonly used accessories, including standard 0.014" and 0.018" guidewires and 5F introducer sheath (or 6F guide catheter). Overall catheter lengths are approximately 120 cm to 150cm.

All materials are identical to approved PTA Balloon Catheter family of products. The distal end of the catheter has a semi-compliant balloon that expands to known diameters (refer to compliance chart) at specific pressures. The balloon contains radiopaque markers to assist with positioning. The Constraining Structure (CS) has been added to the distal part of the catheter. The shaft is braid reinforced and has a lubricious hydrophilic coating. The proximal end of the device is a common PTA catheter connected to a plastic hub and strain relief. The hub is used to inflate the balloon; the luer connector is compatible with standard inflation devices.

The Chocolate Balloon Catheters are supplied sterile and intended for single use only.

The provided text describes the 510(k) summary for the Chocolate PTA Balloon Catheter. However, it does not contain information about acceptance criteria or a study proving the device meets specific acceptance criteria in the context of an AI/ML device.

The document discusses performance data, but it is entirely focused on bench testing for a physical medical device (a catheter), not an AI or software-based medical device. Therefore, the questions related to AI/ML acceptance criteria, ground truth, experts, and sample sizes for training/test sets are not applicable to this submission.

Here's a breakdown of why the requested information cannot be extracted from the provided text:

• Device Type: The device is a "Chocolate PTA Balloon Catheter," which is a physical angioplasty catheter. It's not an AI/ML-driven diagnostic or prognostic tool.
• Performance Data: The performance data described ("Balloon Rated Burst Pressure," "Balloon Inflation and Deflation," "Balloon Fatigue," "Trackability," etc.) are all physical properties and functions of the catheter, evaluated through laboratory bench tests.
• Absence of AI/ML Specifics: There is no mention of algorithms, machine learning models, image analysis, diagnostic performance metrics (e.g., sensitivity, specificity, AUC), ground truth determination by experts, test/training sets of patient data, or any other elements relevant to AI/ML device evaluation.

Conclusion:

The provided document describes a traditional medical device (a balloon catheter) and its mechanical performance testing. It does not contain the information requested regarding acceptance criteria, study design, expert involvement, or data characteristics for an AI/ML device.

Ask a specific question about this device