Search Results
Found 23 results
510(k) Data Aggregation
(80 days)
DESS Dental Smart Solutions abutments are intended to be used in conjunction with endosseous dental implants in the maxillary or mandibular arch to provide support for prosthetic restorations.
All digitally designed custom abutments for use with DESS Bases or Pre-milled Blanks are to be sent to a Terrats Medical validated milling center for manufacture, or to be designed and manufactured according to the digital dentistry workflow. The digital dentistry workflow integrates multiple components: scan files from intra-oral and lab (desktop) scanners, CAD software, CAM software, ceramic material, milling machine, and associated tooling and accessories.
The purpose of this submission is to expand the DESS Dental Smart Solutions abutment system cleared under K221301 and K240982 to allow additional options of zirconia material, scanners, CAM software, and milling machines to the digital dentistry workflow. The subject devices are to be sent to Terrats Medical validated milling centers for manufacture, or to be designed and manufactured via a digital dentistry workflow. The digital dentistry workflow integrates multiple components: scan files from intra-oral and lab (desktop) scanners, CAD software, CAM software, titanium and ceramic material, milling machine, and associated tooling and accessories. There are no changes to the abutment design, implant compatibilities, or design parameters. All part numbers have been cleared for manufacturing via a validated milling center and digital dentistry workflows (also referred to as point of care) under K221301 and K240982.
The subject device DESS Dental Smart Solutions abutments provide a range of prosthetic solutions for dental implant restoration. DESS abutments are offered in a variety of connection types to enable compatibility with currently marketed dental implants. All abutments are provided non-sterile, and each abutment is supplied with the appropriate abutment screw (if applicable) for attachment to the corresponding implant.
Subject device Base Abutments are designed for fabrication of a patient-specific CAD/CAM zirconia superstructure on which a crown may be placed. They are two-piece abutments for which the second part (or top half) is the ceramic superstructure. They also may be used for support of a crown directly on the abutment.
All patient-specific custom abutment fabrication for Base Abutments and Pre-milled (Blank) Abutments is by prescription on the order of the clinician. The subject device Pre-milled (Blank) Abutments and all zirconia superstructures for use with the subject device Ti Base Interface, DESS Aurum Base, ELLIPTIBase, and DESS C-Base will be manufactured using a validated milling center or a digital dentistry workflow. A validated milling center will be under FDA quality system regulations. The digital dentistry workflow scans files from intra-oral and lab (desktop) scanners, CAD software, CAM software, titanium and ceramic material, milling machine and associated tooling and accessories.
The digital dentistry workflow uses scan files from intra-oral and lab (desktop) scanners, CAD software, CAM software, ceramic material, milling machine and associated tooling and accessories.
The provided 510(k) summary for DESS Dental Smart Solutions focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence to predicate devices for dental implant abutments. It primarily addresses the expansion of compatible materials, scanners, CAM software, and milling machines within an existing digital dentistry workflow. The document does not describe an AI/ML-based device that would typically have acceptance criteria related to diagnostic performance.
Therefore, many of the requested items related to AI/ML device performance (like acceptance criteria for diagnostic metrics, sample size for test sets, data provenance, expert qualifications, adjudication methods, MRMC studies, standalone performance, and training set details) are not applicable to this submission.
The acceptance criteria and supporting "study" (non-clinical data) for this device are related to its mechanical performance, biocompatibility, and integration within the digital workflow, demonstrating that the expanded components maintain the safety and effectiveness of the previously cleared predicate devices.
Here's a breakdown based on the information provided and the non-applicability of AI/ML-specific questions:
1. A table of acceptance criteria and the reported device performance
Since this is not an AI/ML diagnostic device, the acceptance criteria are not in terms of traditional diagnostic metrics (sensitivity, specificity, AUC). Instead, they are related to material properties, mechanical integrity, and the digital workflow's accuracy.
Acceptance Criteria Category | Reported Device Performance (Summary from Submission) |
---|---|
Mechanical Integrity / Compatibility | - Fatigue testing of OEM implant bodies with patient-specific abutments made at worst-case angled conditions. (Implies successful completion to similar or better standards than predicate.) |
Biocompatibility | - Biocompatibility testing according to ISO 10993-5 and ISO 10993-12. (Implies successful demonstration of biocompatibility.) |
Sterilization | - Sterilization validation according to ISO 17665-1, ISO 17665-2, and ISO 14937. (Implies successful validation for sterilization.) |
CAD Design Restrictions | - Software verification included testing of restrictions that prevent design of components outside of the stated design parameters. |
- Abutment design library validated to demonstrate established design limitations are locked and cannot be modified by the user. (Implies successful implementation and verification of design constraints.) |
| CAM Restriction Zones / Manufacturing Accuracy | - Validation testing of CAM restriction zones conducted, including verification to show avoidance of damage or modifications of the connection geometry, and locking of restriction zones from user editing in CAM software. (Implies successful validation to ensure manufacturing precision and prevent damage.) |
| Material Conformance | - Zirconia materials conform to ISO 6872. - Titanium alloy conforms to ASTM F136.
- Co-Cr-Mo alloy conforms to ASTM F15337. (Implies materials meet standards.) |
| Physical Dimensions | - Device encompasses the same range of physical dimensions as the predicate device. (Implies dimensional equivalence.) |
2. Sample size used for the test set and the data provenance (e.g. country of origin of the data, retrospective or prospective)
- Sample Size: Not explicitly stated in terms of a "test set" for diagnostic performance. The validation involved physical testing of components (e.g., fatigue testing) and software verification. The specific number of abutments or digital design instances used for these non-clinical tests is not detailed in this summary.
- Data Provenance: Not applicable in the context of patient data for an AI/ML device. The "data" here refers to engineering and material testing results, likely conducted in controlled lab environments (implied to be in accordance with international standards like ISO and ASTM). The manufacturer is Terrats Medical SL, in Spain, so testing would likely originate from their facilities or contracted labs.
3. 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)
Not applicable. This is not a diagnostic device requiring expert interpretation for ground truth. The "ground truth" for this device relates to engineering specifications and material science.
4. Adjudication method (e.g. 2+1, 3+1, none) for the test set
Not applicable. This is not a diagnostic device involving expert review 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 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 not an AI/ML algorithm.
7. The type of ground truth used (expert consensus, pathology, outcomes data, etc.)
For this device, the "ground truth" is based on:
- Engineering Specifications: Defined design parameters (e.g., minimum wall thickness, post height, angulation limits).
- Material Standards: Conformance to international standards such as ASTM F136, ISO 6872.
- Benchmarking/Predicate Equivalence: Performance is assessed against established performance of the predicate devices and OEM implant systems.
- Software Validation Logic: Verification that software correctly enforces design rules and CAD/CAM restrictions.
8. The sample size for the training set
Not applicable. This device does not involve a machine learning training set.
9. How the ground truth for the training set was established
Not applicable. This device does not involve a machine learning training set.
Ask a specific question about this device
(195 days)
ALLONUS Tech Prosthetic is intended for use with dental implants as a support for single or multiple-unit prosthetic restorations in the maxilla or mandible of partially or fully edentulous patient. It is including; cemented retained, screw-retained, or overdenture restorations.
It is compatible with the following systems:
- · Astra OsseoSpeed EV(K130999) 3.0
- · Astra OsseoSpeed EV(K120414) 3.6, 4.2, 4.8, 5.4 mm
- Tapered Internal Implants (K071638) (K143022) 3.4. 3.8. 4.6. 5.8 mm
- · BioHorizons Laser-Lok Implant System (K093321) 3.0 mm
- · Conelog Screw-Line (K113779) 3.3, 3.8, 4.3, 5.0 mm
- Osstem TSIII SA (K121995) 3.5 (3.7) , 4.0 (4.2) , 4.5 (4.6) , 5.0 (5.1), 6.0 (6.0), 7.0 (6.8) mm (Mini. Regular)
- · Megagen AnyRidge Internal Implant System (K140091) 4.0, 4.4, 4.9, 5.4 (3.1)
- · Neodent Implant System GM Helix (K163194, K180536) 3.5, 3.75, 4.0, 4.3, 5.0 (3.0) 6.0 (3.0)
- · Nobel Active 3.0 (K102436) 3.0
- · Nobel Active Internal Connection Implant (K071370) NP RP
- · Nobelactive Wide Platform (Wp) (K133731) WP
- Straumann BLX Implant (K173961, K181703, K191256) 3.5, 3.75, 4.5, 5.5, 6.5 (RB, WB)
- · Straumann 02.9 mm Bone Level Tapered Implants, SC CARES Abutments (K162890) 2.9 (SC)
- · Straumann® Bone Level Tapered Implants (K140878) 3.3, 4.1, 4.8 (NC, RC)
- · Zimmer 3.1mmD Dental Implant System (K142082) 3.1 (2.9)
- (Ti-base only) Screw Vent® and Tapered Screw Vent® (K013227) 3.7(3.5), 4.7(4.5), 6.0(5.7)
All digitally designed abutments and/or coping for use with the abutments are intended to be sent to a ALLONUS Tech-validated milling center for manufacture.
ALLONUS Tech Prosthetic is made of titanium alloy (Ti-6AI-4V ELI, ASTM F136) intended for use as an aid in prosthetic restoration. It consists of Pre-Milled Blank abutment, Ti-Base Abutment, and Multi-unit Abutment and Components (Multi-unit Healing Cap, Multi-unit Temporary cylinder, Multi-unit Ti-cylinder).
Pre-Milled Blank has a pre-manufactured implant interface connection interface with a customizable cylindrical area-by CAD/CAM- above the implant-abutment interface.
Ti Base consists of a two-piece abutment, where the titanium base is a pre-manufactured component of the abutment that will be used to support a CAD/CAM-designed zirconia superstructure (the second part of the two-piece abutment) that composes the final abutment.
Multi-unit Abutment which are placed into the dental implant to provide support for the prosthetic restoration. The abutments are made of Titanium grade Ti-6A1-4V ELI (meets ASTM Standard F-136). Multi-unit Abutment includes abutments and components (Multi-unit Healing Cap, Multi-unit Temporary cylinder, Multi-unit Ti-cylinder). Multi-unit Abutment - are provided in various gingival cuff height ranging from 1 to 6 mm.
All digitally designed abutments and/or coping for use with the abutments are intended to be sent to a ALLONUS Tech-validated milling center for manufacture.
The provided text is a 510(k) Summary for the ALLONUS Tech Prosthetic, which is an endosseous dental implant abutment. It details the device's technical characteristics and compares it to predicate devices to establish substantial equivalence, rather than describing a study that proves the device meets specific acceptance criteria for a new and novel performance claim.
Therefore, many of the requested categories for acceptance criteria and study details are not directly applicable or available in this type of submission. The information provided primarily focuses on demonstrating equivalence through comparison to existing legally marketed devices, material properties, and standard performance tests for similar devices.
However, I can extract the relevant information that is available from the document for each type of device within the ALLONUS Tech Prosthetic family: Pre-Milled Blank, Ti Base, Multi-Unit Abutment, Multi-Unit Healing Cap, Multi-Unit Temporary Cylinder, and Multi-Unit Ti-Cylinder.
General Information on Acceptance Criteria and Studies for ALLONUS Tech Prosthetic (as inferred from the 510(k) Summary):
The ALLONUS Tech Prosthetic is claiming substantial equivalence to predicate devices, meaning it does not need to establish new performance criteria but rather demonstrate that it is as safe and effective as existing legally marketed devices. The "acceptance criteria" here are largely implied by the performance of the predicate devices and the relevant ISO standards for dental implant abutments. The studies performed are non-clinical bench tests.
1. Table of Acceptance Criteria (Inferred from Comparison) and Reported Device Performance:
The document presents comparisons to predicate devices to establish substantial equivalence rather than explicit acceptance criteria and corresponding performance metrics for novel claims. However, the design limits of the subject devices are compared to the design limits of the predicate devices, which act as de facto acceptance criteria in the context of substantial equivalence. The device's performance is demonstrated by meeting the standards in non-clinical testing.
Here's a generalized table summarizing this approach:
Feature/Test | Acceptance Criteria (Based on Predicate/Standards) | Reported Device Performance (Subject Device) |
---|---|---|
Materials | Ti-6Al-4V ELI (ASTM F136) for metallic components, Zirconia Oxide for Ti-Base superstructure | Ti-6Al-4V ELI (ASTM F136) for Pre-Milled Blank, Multi-Unit Abutment, Healing Cap, Temporary Cylinder, Ti-Cylinder. Ti-6Al-4V ELI (ASTM F136) and Zirconia Oxide (InCoris Zi) for Ti Base. |
Fatigue Test (ISO 14801:2016) | Met criteria of the standard. | Met criteria of the standard. (Page 23) |
End-User Steam Sterilization (ISO 17665-1:2006, 17665-2:2009, ANSI/AAMI ST79:2010) | Met criteria of the standard. | Met criteria of the standard. (Page 23) |
Biocompatibility (ISO 10993-1:2009, -5:2009, -10:2010) | Met criteria of the standard. | Met criteria of the standard. (Page 23) |
Implant-to-Abutment Compatibility | Demonstrated by reverse engineering and assessment of OEM components. | Demonstrated compatibility with various OEM implant systems (listed in Indications for Use). Reverse engineering included assessment of maximum and minimum dimensions of critical design aspects and tolerances of OEM implant body, OEM abutment, OEM abutment screw, along with cross-sectional images of the subject device and compatible implant body. (Page 24) |
MR Safety (FDA Guidance "Testing and Labeling Medical Devices for Safety in the Magnetic Resonance (MR) Environment") | Demonstrated substantial equivalence to predicate devices using scientific rationale and published literature for magnetically induced displacement force and torque. | Non-clinical worst-case MRI review performed; rationale addressed parameters per FDA guidance. Results demonstrated substantial equivalence to predicate devices. (Page 24) |
Design Limits (examples) | Pre-Milled Blank: Post Angle: 0-30°, Diameter: 3.0-7.0 mm (Predicate) Ti Base: Post Angle: 0-30°, Diameter: 3.0-7.0 mm (Predicate) Multi-Unit Abutment: Diameter: 4.8 mm, Gingival Height: 1.5-4.5 mm, Angle: 0, 17, 30° (Reference Device) | Pre-Milled Blank: Design limits are "slightly different" but within diameter and angle range of predicate. (Page 11) Specific limits are provided in a table on page 7 for various compatible systems (e.g., Min Gingival Height: 0.5 mm, Max Gingival Height: 5.0-6.0 mm, Min Wall Thickness: 0.3-0.6 mm, Min Post Height: 4.0-4.3 mm). Ti Base: Post Angle: 0-15°, Gingival Height: 0.5-5.0 mm, Post Height: 4.0-6.0 mm, Diameter: 5.0-8.0 mm, Thickness: 0.4 mm. These are "slightly different" but within diameter and angle range of predicate. (Page 17) Multi-Unit Abutment: Diameter: 4.8 mm, Gingival Height: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 mm, Angle: 0, 17, 29°. Diameter is "slightly big," gingival height "slightly different," angles "within the predicate device's range." (Page 18) |
Sterility | Non-sterile (Predicate) | Non-sterile (All subject devices) |
Indications for Use / Intended Use | Similar to predicate devices | ALLONUS Tech Prosthetic is intended for use with dental implants as a support for single or multiple-unit prosthetic restorations in the maxilla or mandible of partially or fully edentulous patients, including cemented-retained, screw-retained, or overdenture restorations. Compatible with various specific implant systems. (Pages 3, 9, 10, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22) |
2. Sample size used for the test set and the data provenance (e.g. country of origin of the data, retrospective or prospective):
- Test Set Sample Size:
- The document does not specify the exact sample sizes used for the non-clinical bench tests (fatigue, sterilization, biocompatibility, or dimensional analysis). It only states that tests were performed "for the subject device" and "of the worst-case scenario through fatigue testing."
- Data Provenance:
- The 510(k) submission is from ALLONUS Tech Co., LTD. in the REPUBLIC OF KOREA. This implies the testing was likely conducted in or overseen by this entity.
- The studies were non-clinical bench tests, not clinical studies involving human patients. Therefore, terms like "retrospective" or "prospective" clinical dataProvenance are not applicable here.
3. Number of experts used to establish the ground truth for the test set and the qualifications of those experts:
- This information is not provided in the 510(k) Summary. For non-clinical bench testing, "ground truth" is typically established by recognized international standards (e.g., ISO, ASTM) and engineering principles, rather than expert consensus on clinical cases.
- The document mentions "Dimensional analysis and reverse engineering... were performed" and "assessment of maximum and minimum dimensions... along with cross-sectional images." This suggests engineering expertise, but specific numbers or qualifications of experts are not stated.
4. Adjudication method (e.g. 2+1, 3+1, none) for the test set:
- This is not applicable as the studies were non-clinical bench tests. Adjudication methods like 2+1 (two readers plus one adjudicator) are used in clinical studies, particularly for diagnostic imaging, to resolve discrepancies in expert interpretations of patient data.
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:
- No, an MRMC comparative effectiveness study was not done. This type of study (MRMC) is relevant for diagnostic AI devices that assist human interpretation of medical images or data. The ALLONUS Tech Prosthetic is a physical medical device (dental implant abutment), not an AI diagnostic tool.
6. If a standalone (i.e. algorithm only without human-in-the loop performance) was done:
- No, a standalone (algorithm-only) performance study was not done. This question is also typically relevant for AI/software as a medical device (SaMD). The ALLONUS Tech Prosthetic is a physical device that integrates with human dental procedures.
7. The type of ground truth used (expert consensus, pathology, outcomes data, etc):
- For the non-clinical tests (fatigue, sterilization, biocompatibility), the "ground truth" is adherence to recognized international standards (ISO, ASTM) and established engineering specifications.
- For implant-to-abutment compatibility, the "ground truth" was based on dimensional analysis and reverse engineering of OEM implant bodies, abutments, and screws, comparing the subject device's design to established OEM specifications.
8. The sample size for the training set:
- This is not applicable. "Training set" refers to data used to train machine learning algorithms. The ALLONUS Tech Prosthetic is a physical medical device, not an AI/ML algorithm.
9. How the ground truth for the training set was established:
- This is not applicable as there is no training set for a physical medical device.
Ask a specific question about this device
(138 days)
DESS Dental Smart Solutions abutments are intended to be used in conjunction with endosseous dental implants in the maxillary or mandibular arch to provide support for prosthetic restorations.
The purpose of this submission is to expand the DESS Dental Smart Solutions abutment system cleared under K221301 to add the ability for the subject device Base Abutments and Pre-milled (Blank) Abutments to be designed using AbutmentCAD software in the digital dentistry workflow, as well as add angulation to some of the Pre-Milled (Blank) Abutments. The subject devices are to Terrats Medical validated milling centers for manufacture, or to be designed and manufactured via a digital dentistry workflow. The digital dentistry workflow integrates multiple components: scan files from intra-oral and lab (desktop) scanners, CAD software, CAM software, titanium and ceramic material, milling machine, and associated tooling and accessories. The proposed change is to allow the subject devices to be designed using AbutmentCAD by exocad GmbH, the current workflow allows only the use of 3Shape by 3Shape A/S for the design software. Another purpose of this submission is to expand the design parameters to allow angulation (up to 30°) on Pre-milled (Blank) Abutments that are compatible with Neodent Grand Morse, Nobel Active/Nobel Parallel Conical 3.0 mm, and Straumann BLX implants. There are no changes to the abutment design or implant compatibilities. All part numbers have been cleared for manufacturing via a validated milling center and digital dentistry workflows in under K221301.
The subject device DESS Dental Solutions abutments provide a range of prosthetic solutions for dental implant restoration. DESS abutments are offered in a variety of connection types to enable compatibility with currently marketed dental implants. All abutments are provided non-sterile, and each abutment is supplied with the appropriate abutment screw (if applicable) for attachment to the corresponding implant.
Subject device Base Abutments are designed for fabrication of a patient-specific CAD/CAM zirconia superstructure on which a crown may be placed. They are two-piece abutments for which the second part (or top half) is the ceramic superstructure. They also may be used for support of a crown directly on the abutment.
All patient-specific custom abutment fabrication for Base Abutments and Pre-milled (Blank) Abutments is by prescription on the order of the clinician. The subject device Pre-milled (Blank) Abutments and all zirconia superstructures for use with the subject device Ti Base Interface, DESS Aurum Base, ELLIPTIBase, and DESS C-Base will be manufactured using a validated milling center or a digital dentistry workflow. A validated milling center will be under FDA quality system regulations. The digital dentistry workflow scans files from intra-oral and lab (desktop) scanners, CAD software, titanium and ceramic material, milling machine and associated tooling and accessories.
The digital dentistry workflow uses scan files from intra-oral and lab (desktop) scanners, CAD software, CAM software, ceramic material, milling machine and associated tooling and accessories. The digital workflow includes the following products (not subject devices of this submission):
- Ceramic material: VITA YZ ST and VITA YZ XT (K180703)
- . Cement: Ivoclar Vivadent Multilink Hybrid Abutment Cement (K130436)
- . Intraoral Scanner: 3Shape TRIOS A/S Series Intraoral Scanner (510(k) exempt under 21 CFR 872.3661)
- Desktop scanner: 3Shape D900 Dental Lab Scanner (510(k) exempt under 21 CFR 872.3661)
- Abutment design software: 3Shape Abutment Designer Software (K151455) and AbutmentCAD ● (K193352)
- . Milling machine: VHF R5 by vhf camfacture AG with DentalCAM and DentalCNC 7 software
The provided text describes a 510(k) premarket notification for DESS Dental Smart Solutions, which are dental implant abutments. This type of submission focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence to a legally marketed predicate device, rather than proving a device's effectiveness through clinical performance studies with specific statistical acceptance criteria for accuracy, sensitivity, or specificity.
Therefore, the document does not contain the information requested regarding:
- A table of acceptance criteria and reported device performance (in terms of clinical metrics like accuracy, sensitivity, specificity).
- Sample size used for the test set or its provenance.
- Number of experts used to establish ground truth or their qualifications.
- Adjudication method for the test set.
- Multi-Reader Multi-Case (MRMC) comparative effectiveness study or its effect size.
- Standalone (algorithm only) performance.
- Type of ground truth used (expert consensus, pathology, outcomes data).
- Sample size for the training set.
- How the ground truth for the training set was established.
The study described in this document focuses on non-clinical performance data to demonstrate substantial equivalence, specifically:
- Sterilization validation: According to ISO 17665-1, ISO 17665-2, and ISO 14937.
- Biocompatibility testing: According to ISO 10993-5 and ISO 10993-12.
- Fatigue testing and reverse engineering analysis: Of OEM implant bodies, OEM abutments, and OEM abutment screws to confirm compatibility. This includes fatigue testing of OEM implant bodies with patient-specific abutments made at worst-case angled conditions.
- MR Conditional labeling.
- Validation testing of CAM restriction zones: Including verification to show avoidance of damage or modifications of the connection geometry, and locking of restriction zones from user editing in the CAM software.
- Software verification: Included testing of restrictions that prevent design of components outside of the stated design parameters. The abutment design library was validated to demonstrate that established design limitations and specifications are locked and cannot be modified by the user.
The acceptance criteria and reported "performance" for this submission are based on these engineering and design validations, ensuring the device meets safety and performance standards equivalent to the predicate device, K221301. The key "performance" metrics are about maintaining physical and material integrity and compatibility.
The core of the submission is to expand the DESS Dental Smart Solutions abutment system to:
- Allow design using AbutmentCAD software (in addition to 3Shape software).
- Add angulation (up to 30°) to some Pre-milled (Blank) Abutments for specific implant systems.
The document explicitly states: "No clinical data were included in this submission." and "The subject device, the predicate device, and reference devices have the same intended use, technological characteristics, and are materials. The subject device, the predicate device, and reference devices encompass the same range of physical dimensions, manufactured by similar methods, are packaged in similar materials, and are to be sterilized using similar methods. The data included in this submission demonstrate substantial equivalence to the predicate devices listed above."
Therefore, this FDA submission is for a physical medical device (dental implant abutment) and its manufacturing/design software modifications, not an AI or diagnostic device that would involve clinical performance metrics like sensitivity or specificity.
Ask a specific question about this device
(126 days)
AOT & T-L Abutment is intended for use in conjunction with the fixture in partially or fully edentulous mandibles and maxillae, in support of multiple-unit restorations.
It is compatible with the following systems:
- · Astra OsseoSpeed EV(K130999) 3.0
- · Astra OsseoSpeed EV(K120414) 3.6, 4.2, 4.8, 5.4 mm
- · Dentium Company Limited Implantium (K041368): 3.6, 4.0, 4.5, 5.0 (Regular)
- · Implant Direct Legacy2(K192221) 3.0
- · Megagen AnyRidge Internal Implant System (K140091) 3.5, 4.0, 4.4, 4.9, 5.4 (3.1)
- Neodent Implant System GM Helix (K163194, K180536) 3.5, 3.75, 4.0, 4.3, 5.0 (3.0) 6.0 (3.0)
- · Nobel Active 3.0 (K102436) 3.0
- · Nobel Active Internal Connection Implant (K071370) NP RP 3.5, 4.3, 5.0
- · Nobelactive Wide Platform (Wp) (K133731) WP 5.5
- · TS Fixture System (K121995) 3.5 (3.75), 4.0 (4.2), 4.5 (4.6) , 5.0 (5.1) mm (Mini, Regular)
- Straumann BLX Implant (K173961, K181703, K191256) 3.5, 3.75, 4.0, 4.5, 5.0, 5.5, 6.5 (RB, WB)
- · Straumann 02.9 mm Bone Level Tapered Implants, SC CARES Abutments (K162890) 2.9 (SC)
- · Straumann® Bone Level Tapered Implants (K140878) 3.3, 4.1, 4.8 (NC, RC)
- · Zimmer 3.1mmD Dental Implant System (K142082) 3.1 (2.9)
- · Screw Vent® and Tapered Screw Vent® (K013227) 3.7(3.5), 4.1(3.5), 4.7(4.5), 6.0(5.7)
AOT & T-L Abutment which are placed into the dental implant to provide support for the prosthetic restoration. The abutments are made of Titanium grade Ti-6A1-4V ELI (meets ASTM Standard F-136). AOT abutment is a straight multi-unit abutment that connect implant fixtures to a restoration, such as a dental bridge or a denture. AOT products includes abutments and components (AOT Base, AOT Temporary, AOT Base Screw, AOT Plus Screw). T-L abutment is for partial and full arch restorations on endosseous dental implants. AOT & T-L abutments are provided in various gingival cuff height ranging from 1 to 3 mm for AOT , 1 to 6 mm for T-L.
The provided document describes the TruAbutment Inc. AOT & T-L Abutment and its substantial equivalence to a predicate device. This document focuses on the non-clinical testing for dental implant abutments, primarily mechanical and sterilization performance, rather than clinical efficacy involving human readers or AI.
Therefore, many of the requested categories related to human-in-the-loop performance, statistical measures like effect size, and large-scale clinical study methodologies are not applicable to this 510(k) submission.
Here's a breakdown of the available information based on your request:
Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance
The acceptance criteria are implicitly defined by compliance with specified ISO standards and FDA guidance documents. The reported device performance is that it met these criteria.
Acceptance Criteria (Standard / Guidance) | Reported Device Performance |
---|---|
Fatigue Test: ISO 14801:2016 | Met the criteria of the standard. |
End User Steam Sterilization: ISO 17665-1:2006, 17665-2:2009, ANSI/AAMI ST79:2010 | Met the criteria of the standard. |
Biocompatibility: ISO 10993-1:2009, ISO 10993-5:2009, ISO 10993-10:2010 | Met the criteria of the standard. |
FDA Guidance: "Class II Special Controls Guidance Document: Rootform Endosseous Dental Implants and Endosseous Dental Implant Abutments" | Complied with the guidance for comparative fatigue testing. |
Substantial Equivalence (Mechanical Strength): For all compatible OEM implant lines | Fatigue limit data demonstrated the construct strengths to be substantially equivalent to the predicate device. |
Material: Ti-6Al-4V ELI (ASTM F136) | Confirmed to be made of this material. |
Sterile State: Non-sterile (end-user sterilization) | Confirmed by sterilization validation. |
Intended Use: Functionally equivalent to predicate | Verified to be substantially equivalent in intended use. |
Design/Dimensions: Similar to predicate (with minor differences considered acceptable) | Dimensional analysis and reverse engineering indicated compatibility and substantial equivalence despite minor differences. |
Study Details
-
Sample size used for the test set and the data provenance (e.g., country of origin of the data, retrospective or prospective):
- Sample Size: Not explicitly stated for specific tests. For mechanical fatigue testing (ISO 14801), it mentions "worst-case constructs" were subjected to testing, implying a representative selection rather than a large clinical sample. Industry standards typically specify minimum sample sizes for such tests (e.g., 5-10 samples per test group for fatigue).
- Data Provenance: Not specified, but likely from laboratory testing conducted by the manufacturer or a contracted third-party lab. It's a non-clinical, bench-top study.
- Retrospective or Prospective: Non-clinical laboratory testing is neither retrospective nor prospective in the clinical sense. It's a controlled experimental study.
-
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):
- Not applicable. This is a non-clinical, bench-top engineering and materials performance study, not a diagnostic or clinical efficacy study requiring expert human interpretation of data for ground truth. Compliance with engineering standards and material specifications forms the basis of "ground truth."
-
Adjudication method (e.g., 2+1, 3+1, none) for the test set:
- Not applicable. Adjudication methods are typically used in clinical trials or studies involving subjective human interpretation (e.g., image reading) to resolve discrepancies. This study involves objective measurements from laboratory tests.
-
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 non-clinical technical performance study for dental implant abutments, not a study evaluating human reader performance or AI assistance.
-
If a standalone (i.e. algorithm only without human-in-the-loop performance) was done:
- Not applicable. This device is a physical dental abutment, not a software algorithm. The "standalone" performance here refers to the device's inherent mechanical properties and material characteristics as tested against engineering standards.
-
The type of ground truth used (expert consensus, pathology, outcomes data, etc.):
- Ground Truth: Engineering standards (ISO 14801, ISO 17665, ISO 10993), material specifications (ASTM F136), and dimensional compatibility with OEM implant systems. Performance is measured objectively against these established criteria.
-
The sample size for the training set:
- Not applicable. There is no "training set" in the context of this non-clinical performance evaluation. This is not a machine learning or AI device.
-
How the ground truth for the training set was established:
- Not applicable for the same reason as above.
Ask a specific question about this device
(87 days)
SIMDA Abutments are intended for use with dental implants as a support for single or multiple tooth prostheses in the maxilla or mandible of a partially or fully edentulous patient.
SIMDA Abutment is made of titanium alloy (Ti-6Al-4V ELI, ASTM F136) intended for use as an aid in prosthetic restoration. It consists of Pre-Milled Blank and Ti-Base abutment. It has a premanufactured connection interface that fits directly to an endosseous dental implant.
This FDA 510(k) summary describes a dental device, the SIMDA Abutment. However, it does not include information that directly addresses the specific questions you've asked about acceptance criteria and a study proving a device meets them, particularly for an AI/ML powered device.
Here's why and what information is provided:
The document is a premarket notification for a Class II medical device, specifically dental implant abutments. These are physical components used in dental restorations, not an AI/ML powered diagnostic or therapeutic device. Therefore, the concepts of "acceptance criteria for an AI model," "test set," "ground truth," "MRMC studies," "effect size of human readers with AI assistance," or "standalone algorithm performance" are not applicable to this submission.
The "studies" mentioned are non-clinical (mechanical, biological) tests demonstrating the physical safety and performance of the abutments and their compatibility with existing dental implant systems.
Here's a breakdown of the relevant information provided, framed as closely as possible to your request, but acknowledging the device type:
Device: SIMDA Abutments (K232271)
Device Type: Endosseous Dental Implant Abutment (physical medical device, not AI/ML powered)
1. A table of acceptance criteria and the reported device performance
The document sets design limits and then demonstrates conformity through non-clinical testing. The "acceptance criteria" here are rather design specifications and performance standards for dental abutments.
Acceptance Criteria (Design Parameters/Limitations) | Reported Device Performance (Demonstrated through testing) |
---|---|
Pre-Milled Blank (for Patient-specific abutment): | |
- Minimum and Maximum Gingival (Cuff) Height: 0.5~5mm | "The minor difference between the two products in the design parameters [...] was evaluated as part of the performance testing and was determined to not impact the performance of the device." - Implies device meets these parameters and performs acceptably. |
- Minimum and Maximum diameter at abutment/implant interface: Ø4.0~Ø8.0 | |
- Minimum and Maximum length of abutment: 4.5~13mm | |
- Minimum and Maximum length of abutment post (length above the abutment collar/gingival height): 4~8mm | |
- Minimum wall thickness at abutment/implant interface: 0.4mm (Predicate: 0.4mm, Proposed: 0.39~0.55mm) | "This change in technological characteristics [minimum thickness] was evaluated as part of the performance testing and was determined to not impact the performance of the device." - Indicates the slightly wider range for the proposed device (0.39-0.55mm) still met performance requirements. |
- Minimum and Maximum abutment angle: 0~25° | |
Ti-Base (for Zirconia top-half): | |
- Post Angle (°): 0~15 | Identical to predicate. Non-clinical testing results "demonstrated the substantial equivalence with the primary predicate." |
- Cuff Height (mm): 0.5~5.0 | |
- Post Length (mm): 4.0~6.0 | |
- Diameter (Ø, mm): 5.0~8.0 | |
- Thickness (mm): 0.4 | |
General Performance: | |
- Fatigue Resistance: Must meet ISO 14801 and FDA special controls guidance. | Fatigue testing followed ISO 14801 and the FDA special controls guidance document. Results "demonstrated the substantial equivalence with the primary predicate." |
- Sterilization Efficacy: Must meet ISO 17665-1:2006, 17665-2:2009, ANSI/AAMI ST79:2010. | End User Steam Sterilization Test according to ISO 17665-1:2006, 17665-2:2009 and ANSI/AAMI ST79:2010. Results "demonstrated the substantial equivalence with the primary predicate." |
- Biocompatibility: Must meet ISO 10993-1:2009, ISO 10993-5:2009, and ISO 10993-10:2010. | Biocompatibility tests according to ISO 10993-1:2009, ISO 10993-5:2009, and ISO 10993-10:2010. Results "demonstrated the substantial equivalence with the primary predicate." |
- MRI Safety: Must address magnetically induced displacement force and torque (per FDA guidance "Testing and Labeling Medical Devices for Safety in the Magnetic Resonance (MR) Environment"). | "Non-clinical worst-case MRI review was performed... using scientific rationale and published literature... Rationale addressed parameters per the FDA guidance... including magnetically induced displacement force and torque." - Implies the device is deemed safe in the MR environment based on this review. |
- Compatibility with OEM Implant Systems: Precision implant/abutment interface. | Dimensional analysis and reverse engineering of critical features... Cross sectional images were provided to demonstrate substantially equivalent compatibility. The testing aided implant to abutment compatibility and has established substantial equivalency of the proposed device with the predicate device. |
2. Sample sized used for the test set and the data provenance (e.g. country of origin of the data, retrospective or prospective)
- This information is not provided. For physical tests (fatigue, biocompatibility, sterilization), sample sizes would typically be determined by the relevant ISO standards.
3. 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)
- Not applicable. "Ground truth" in the context of AI/ML is not relevant here. The "truth" is established by physical measurement, adherence to material standards, and documented mechanical performance.
4. Adjudication method (e.g. 2+1, 3+1, none) for the test set
- Not applicable. Adjudication methods are typically for subjective assessments, whereas these are objective physical tests.
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 physical dental device, 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 dental device.
7. The type of ground truth used (expert consensus, pathology, outcomes data, etc)
- For physical tests, the "ground truth" is defined by the ISO standards and FDA guidance documents to which the device is tested. This includes established methods for fatigue testing, biocompatibility evaluation, and sterilization efficacy. For compatibility, it's about precise dimensional matching and mechanical fit to existing OEM implant systems.
8. The sample size for the training set
- Not applicable. This is a physical dental device, not an AI/ML powered device that requires a "training set."
9. How the ground truth for the training set was established
- Not applicable. See point 8.
In summary, this document is for a traditional medical device (dental abutments), and thus the questions formulated for an AI/ML device do not directly apply. The acceptance criteria are based on established engineering and materials standards, and performance is demonstrated through non-clinical laboratory testing rather than clinical or observational studies on diagnostic performance.
Ask a specific question about this device
(219 days)
Preat Abutments are intended to be used in conjunction with endosseous dental implants in the maxillary or mandbular arch to provide support for single-unit or multi-unit prosthetic restorations. The Titanium Base abutments consists of two major parts. Specifically, the titanium base and the mesostructured components make up a two-piece abutment.
All digitally designed custom abutments, superstructures, and/or hybrid crowns for use with Titanium Blanks are to be sent to a Preat validated milling center for manufacture.
Preat Abutments were previously cleared under K183518. The purpose of this submission is to obtain marketing clearance for additional compatible implant systems under the Preat Abutments device name. This submission for Preat Abutments is a dental implant abutment system that includes nine (9) abutment designs compatible with five (5) OEM implant systems. The Subject device abutment platform diameters range from 2.9 mm to 5.4 mm, and the corresponding compatible implant body diameters also range from 3.0 mm to 7.0 mm. The Subject device includes the following abutment designs: temporary engaging, multi-unit straight, multi-unit angled 17°, multi-unit angled 30°, engaging titanium base, titanium blank and healing abutments. The system also includes corresponding abutment screws.
All abutments and screws are manufactured from Ti-6Al-4V ELI alloy conforming to ASTM F136 and are provided non-sterile to the end user. All digitally designed custom abutments for use with Titanium Base (superstructures) or Titanium Blank are to be sent to a Preat validated milling center for manufacture. All superstructures are to be manufactured from zirconia conforming to ISO 13356. Digitally designed CAD/CAM abutments must have a 0.5 mm minimum gingival height dimension.
The Titanium Base abutment is composed of two-piece abutment that is a titanium base at the bottom and a zirconia superstructure (CAD/CAM patient specific superstructure) at the top. The zirconia superstructure is straight only and is not to be designed to provide an angle or divergence correction.
For the Titanium Base abutment, the design parameters for the CAD/CAM zirconia superstructure are: Minimum wall thickness - 0.5 mm; Minimum post height for single-unit restorations – 4.0 mm; Maximum gingival height – 5.0 mm; and All zirconia superstructures are for straight abutments only. The design parameters for the CAD/CAM Titanium Blank custom abutment are:
Minimum wall thickness – 0.5 mm to 0.9 mm (varies by implant line); Minimum post height for single-unit restoration – 4.0 mm; Maximum Angle - 30°*; and Minimum gingival height - 0.5 mm; Maximum gingival height – 2.0 mm to 4.5 mm (varies by implant line). * Astra Tech® OsseoSpeed™ Plus (OsseoSpeed™ EV) compatible are limited to 0° maximum correction angle.
The provided document describes the Preat Abutments and their substantial equivalence to predicate devices, based on non-clinical performance data. It does not contain information about studies involving human readers, ground truth establishment for a test or training set, or specific details on sample sizes for a test set in the context of AI/algorithm performance.
Here's the information that can be extracted relevant to acceptance criteria and device performance based on the provided text:
1. A table of acceptance criteria and the reported device performance:
The document describes non-clinical performance data used to demonstrate substantial equivalence, focusing on mechanical testing and material properties. The acceptance criteria are implicitly met by comparing the subject device to predicate and reference devices, and by conforming to relevant ISO standards where applicable.
Acceptance Criteria (Implicit) | Reported Device Performance |
---|---|
Mechanical Strength & Durability: | |
- Static Compression (ISO 14801) | Worst-case constructs for each compatible OEM implant line (except Astra Tech OsseoSpeed EV) were subjected to static compression testing according to ISO 14801. (Performance data is implied to be acceptable as part of demonstrating substantial equivalence). |
- Compression Fatigue (ISO 14801) | Worst-case constructs for each compatible OEM implant line (except Astra Tech OsseoSpeed EV) were subjected to compression fatigue testing according to ISO 14801. (Performance data is implied to be acceptable as part of demonstrating substantial equivalence). |
Biocompatibility: | Demonstrated through predicate device testing according to ISO 10993-1 and ISO 10993-5. (Implies the Preat Abutments meet these biocompatibility standards). |
Sterilization Efficacy: | Demonstrated through and leveraged from predicate device testing according to ISO 17665-1 and ISO 14937. (Implies the Preat Abutments, and the recommended end-user sterilization method, meet these standards). |
Magnetic Resonance (MR) Safety: | Non-clinical worst-case MRI review performed based on scientific rationale and published literature (e.g., Woods et al., 2019) and FDA guidance "Testing and Labeling Medical Devices for Safety in the Magnetic Resonance (MR) Environment." Rationale addressed parameters including magnetically induced displacement force and torque. (Implies the device is deemed safe for the MR environment based on this review). |
Material Conformance: | Abutments and screws manufactured from Ti-6Al-4V ELI alloy conforming to ASTM F136. Zirconia superstructures manufactured from Zirconia conforming to ISO 13356. (Implies materials meet specified standards). |
Design Parameters for CAD/CAM Components (e.g., Superstructure, Blank): | For Titanium Base abutment zirconia superstructure: Minimum wall thickness - 0.5 mm; Minimum post height for single-unit restorations – 4.0 mm; Maximum gingival height – 5.0 mm; and All zirconia superstructures are for straight abutments only. |
For CAD/CAM Titanium Blank custom abutment: Minimum wall thickness – 0.5 mm to 0.9 mm (varies); Minimum post height for single-unit restoration – 4.0 mm; Maximum Angle - 30°* (Astra Tech® OsseoSpeed™ Plus-compatible limited to 0° max. correction); Minimum gingival height - 0.5 mm; Maximum gingival height – 2.0 mm to 4.5 mm (varies). | |
(Implies that these design parameters are met as part of manufactured components). | |
Compatibility with Implant Systems: | Demonstrated through reverse engineering of OEM implant bodies, OEM abutments, and OEM abutment screws, confirmed with mechanical testing. (Implied that the device is compatible with the listed OEM implant systems and their interfaces). |
"Substantially Equivalent" (Overall): | The subject device is substantially equivalent to the predicate device (K183518) in indications, intended use, design principles, materials (Ti-6Al-4V alloy), and mode of operation. Differences are related to compatible implant systems and additional abutment designs, supported by reference devices and mitigated by mechanical performance testing. |
2. 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 detail specific sample sizes for the mechanical testing ("worst-case constructs"). The data provenance is not explicitly stated in terms of country of origin, nor is it described as retrospective or prospective in the context of test sets. The studies are non-clinical (laboratory testing).
3. 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. The studies described are non-clinical performance and material conformance tests, not diagnostic studies or those requiring expert interpretation of results to establish ground truth in the way medical imaging algorithms might.
4. Adjudication method (e.g. 2+1, 3+1, none) for the test set:
This information is not applicable. Adjudication methods typically apply to human interpretation of data, often in clinical studies or when establishing ground truth for AI algorithms, which is not the nature of the studies described.
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:
This information is not applicable. An MRMC comparative effectiveness study is used for diagnostic AI devices involving human readers. This document describes non-clinical performance testing for dental abutments, which is a physical device, not an AI algorithm.
6. If a standalone (i.e. algorithm only without human-in-the-loop performance) was done:
This information is not applicable. The device is a physical dental abutment, not an algorithm.
7. The type of ground truth used (expert consensus, pathology, outcomes data, etc):
The concept of "ground truth" as typically used in the context of evaluating diagnostic algorithms (e.g., expert consensus, pathology) is not applicable here. For the non-clinical tests, the "ground truth" or reference for performance is the compliance with specified ISO and ASTM standards and the performance of the predicate/reference devices through comparative testing. For example:
- Mechanical Testing: The "ground truth" would be the passing criteria defined by ISO 14801.
- Material Conformance: The "ground truth" would be the specifications in ASTM F136 and ISO 13356.
- Biocompatibility & Sterilization: The "ground truth" would be the specifications in ISO 10993-1, ISO 10993-5, ISO 17665-1, and ISO 14937.
8. The sample size for the training set:
This information is not applicable. There is no AI algorithm being described, and therefore no training set.
9. How the ground truth for the training set was established:
This information is not applicable for the same reason as above.
Ask a specific question about this device
(315 days)
The Paltop Narrow Implant is indicated for use in surgical and restorative applications for placement in the mandibular central, lateral incisor and maxillary lateral incisor regions of partially edentulous jaws where the horizontal space is limited by the adjacent teeth and roots, to provide support for prosthetic devices, such as artificial teeth, in order to restore the patient's chewing function. The Paltop Narrow Implant is indicated also for immediate loading when good primary stability is achieved and with appropriate occlusal loading.
This submission expands the Predicate Narrow Implant device to include 3.0 mm diameter implants, additional implant thread configurations and additional prosthetic components to the previously cleared Paltop Narrow Implant (K130462).
Endosseous dental implants are surgically implanted into a patient's mouth to provide support for prosthetic devices, such as artificial teeth, in order to restore the patient's chewing function. Endosseous dental implant abutments are secured to dental implants with a retaining screw to provide support for prosthetic devices, such as artificial teeth, in order to restore the patient's chewing function.
Paltop Narrow Implant are one- and two-stage endosseous screw type dental implants with associated abutments. The implants, titanium abutment screws are fabricated from a Titanium-6 Aluminum 4 Vanadium ELI titanium alloy which conforms to ASTM F136. The Paltop Narrow Implants are surface treated with SLA (Sand-blasted, Large Grit, Acid Etched).
The implants are available in three thread/body configurations: Advanced, Advanced+, and Dynamic. The Advanced, Advanced+ and Dynamic implants have micro threads at the neck. All implants have a parallel coronal and mid-section area with an apical taper. The families have slight differences in thread profile and either a passive or active apex. The 3.0 mm diameter implants are prosthetically compatible with the previously cleared Paltop Narrow Implant (K130462) prosthetic devices.
This submission introduces Single-Unit Abutments for the Paltop Narrow Implant device. The submission replaces the original straight Multi-Unit Abutments from the K130462 submission and includes additional gingival heights. The submission also introduces an angulated Multi-Unit titanium abutment, all compatible with the Paltop Narrow Implant device. The submission expands the compatible prosthetic components to include new temporary titanium abutments and healing caps compatible with Single-Unit and Multi-Unit titanium implant abutments.
The Subject device implants may be used with the Predicate device abutments previously cleared under K130462, based on non-clinical performance bench testing provided in this submission.
The Subject device abutments may be used with the Predicate device implants previously cleared under K130462, based on non-clinical performance bench testing provided in this submission. The only exception is the implant cover screw (P/N 80-70100) which is specific to the 3.0 mm diameter implants in this submission.
The Subject device Multi-Unit Abutment components such as copings/interfaces, temporary abutments, cylinders, and screws may be used with the Predicate device Multi-Unit Abutments previously cleared under K130462 based on non-clinical performance bench testing provided in this submission.
All implants and prosthetic components are one-time use devices. All Subject devices in this submission are provided sterile and sterilized by gamma irradiation except for Single-Unit and Multi-Unit copings and all replacement screws which are provided non-sterile. Devices provided as non-sterilized by steam.
Here's a breakdown of the acceptance criteria and the study information for the Paltop Narrow Implant, based on the provided document.
1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance
The document does not explicitly state numerical acceptance criteria in a table format for specific performance metrics like fatigue life or bone-to-implant contact percentages. Instead, it refers to industry standards and general outcomes. The reported device performance is presented narratively.
Performance Characteristic | Acceptance Criteria (implied/standards referenced) | Reported Device Performance |
---|---|---|
Fatigue Strength | Conformance to ISO 14801:2016 for dynamic loading | Successfully tested to ISO 14801:2016. Worst-case scenario chosen. |
Biocompatibility | Suitable biocompatibility | Demonstrated suitable biocompatibility based on review of published literature, internal routine monitoring data, and post-market surveillance data. |
Osseointegration | Successful osseointegration, industry-accepted bone level changes | 92% of implants showed bone level improvement or maintenance; bone level decreases less than 1mm; 100% met criteria for successful osseointegration. |
Implant Survival Rate | Failure rates below industry levels | Post-market surveillance indicated failure rates below industry levels. |
Residual Aluminum Particles | No negative impact on osseointegration and implant survival | Evaluation supported previous findings that residual aluminum particles (if present) from specific surface treatment do not negatively impact osseointegration and implant survival. |
Endotoxin Levels | Conformance to USP | Confirmatory endotoxin testing performed according to USP acceptance criteria. |
Sterilization (Sterile Components) | Suitable sterilization | Demonstrated suitable sterilization based on predicate/reference device validations. |
Sterilization (Non-Sterile Components) | Suitable sterilization (cleaning validation, ISO 17665-1) | Cleaning validation and sterilization per ISO 17665-1 performed for non-sterile components and components requiring subsequent sterilization. |
2. Sample Size Used for the Test Set and Data Provenance
The document does not explicitly state a test set sample size for each specific non-clinical test in terms of a number of devices. It refers to general testing.
- For the bone changes evaluation (part of biocompatibility/osseointegration): "A total of 174 surfaces were graded (87 implants)."
- Data provenance: The bone changes evaluation references "published literature" on patients, suggesting retrospective (or possibly prospective clinical studies mentioned in the literature). "Internal routine monitoring data" and "post-market surveillance data" are mentioned, indicating real-world data collection, likely retrospective for surveillance and ongoing for monitoring. The manufacturer is Paltop Advanced Dental Solutions, Ltd, Hashita 5, Industrial Park, Caesarea 3088900, Israel.
3. Number of Experts Used to Establish Ground Truth and Qualifications
The document doesn't specify the number or qualifications of experts used to establish "ground truth" for the test set. For the bone level evaluation, it states "Mesial and distal surfaces were examined and graded." It is implied that these evaluations were done by qualified clinical professionals as part of the published literature or internal monitoring, but no specific details are provided.
4. Adjudication Method
No adjudication method is mentioned for any of the evaluations (e.g., bone level grading, or evaluation of non-clinical tests). The document implies acceptance based on test results meeting standards or being comparable to predicate devices.
5. Multi-Reader Multi-Case (MRMC) Comparative Effectiveness Study
No MRMC comparative effectiveness study is mentioned. This device is an endosseous dental implant, not an AI diagnostic tool, so an MRMC study comparing human readers with and without AI assistance is not applicable.
6. Standalone Performance Study
The primary studies detailed are "non-clinical bench performance testing." This refers to laboratory testing of the device itself (fatigue, pull-out, etc.) and biological evaluations based on literature review and historical data, which are "standalone" in the sense that they assess the device's physical and biological properties. There is no human element being assessed.
7. Type of Ground Truth Used
The ground truth used several types:
- Industry Standards: For fatigue testing (ISO 14801:2016), endotoxin testing (USP ), and sterilization (ISO 17665-1).
- Clinical Outcomes Data: For osseointegration and implant survival (from published literature and post-market surveillance). This includes "bone level improvement or maintenance" and "failure rates below industry levels."
- Analytical Data: SEM/EDS data for residual particles.
- Comparison to Predicate/Reference Devices: Demonstrating similarity in design and performance to already cleared devices.
8. Sample Size for the Training Set
The document does not mention a "training set" or "training data" in the context of an algorithm or AI. This is a medical device (dental implant) that undergoes physical and biological performance testing, not a machine learning model.
9. How the Ground Truth for the Training Set Was Established
Not applicable, as there is no training set for an algorithm described in this document.
Ask a specific question about this device
(79 days)
NobelProcera Zirconia Implant Bridge (previously cleared per K202452) The NobelProcera® Zirconia Implant Bridge are indicated for use as a bridge anatomically shaped and/or framework in the treatment of partially edentulous jaws for the purpose of restoring chewing function.
TiUltra Implants and Xeal Abutments (previously cleared per K202344) NobelActive TiUltra NobelActive TiUltra implants are endosseous implants intended to be surgically placed in the upper or lower jaw bone for anchoring or supporting tooth replacements to restore patient esthetics and chewing function. Nobel Active Tilltra implants are indicated for single or multiple unit restorations in splinted applications. This can be achieved by a 2-stage or 1-stage surgical technique in combination with immediate, early or delayed loading protocols, recognizing sufficient primary stability and appropriate occlusal loading for the selected technique. NobelActive TiUltra 3.0 implants are intended to replace a lateral incisor in the maxilla and/or a central incisor in the mandible. Nobel Active TiUltra 3.0 implants are indicated for single-unit restorations only. NobelReplace CC TiUltra NobelReplace CC TiUltra implants are endosseous dental implants intended to be surgically placed in the bone of the upper or lower jaw arches to provide support for prosthetic devices, such as an artificial tooth, in order to restore patient esthetics and chewing function. The NobelReplace CC TiUltra implants are indicated for single or multiple unit restorations. The NobelReplace CC Tilltra implants can be used in splinted or non-splications. The NobelReplace CC TiUltra implant may be placed immediately and put into immediate function provided that initial stability requirements detailed in the manual are satisfied. NobelParallel CC TiUltra NobelParallel CC TiUltra implants are endosseous implants intended to be surgically placed in the upper or lower jaw bone for anchoring or supporting replacements to restore patient esthetics and chewing function. NobelParallel CC TiUltra implants are indicated for single or multiple restorations in splinted applications. This can be achieved by a 2-stage or 1-stage surgical techniques in combination with immediate, early of delayed loading protocols, recognizing sufficient primary stability and appropriate occlusal loading for the selected technique. Implants with
Not Found
This document is a 510(k) premarket notification decision letter from the FDA to Nobel Biocare AG regarding their Dental Implant Systems Portfolio - MR Conditional. It explicitly states that the letter covers indications for use and general controls, but does not contain information about acceptance criteria or performance studies for the device itself.
Therefore, I cannot provide the requested information for the following reasons:
- Acceptance Criteria and Performance Data: The document is a regulatory clearance letter, not a clinical study report. It does not contain acceptance criteria for device performance, nor does it present any data from studies proving the device meets particular criteria. The letter confirms substantial equivalence to legally marketed predicate devices, which means the FDA has determined the device is as safe and effective as a previously cleared device, not that specific performance metrics were tested and met in a new study.
- Study Details (Sample size, data provenance, experts, adjudication, MRMC, Standalone, Ground Truth, Training Set): Since no performance study data is included in this FDA 510(k) clearance letter, none of these details can be extracted. The document refers to various previously cleared predicate devices (e.g., K202452, K202344, K181869), but it doesn't describe the studies that led to their clearance.
In summary, the provided text does not contain the information necessary to describe acceptance criteria or a study proving the device meets those criteria.
Ask a specific question about this device
(333 days)
TruBase S is a titanium component that is directly connected to endosseous dental implants to provide support for custom prosthetic restorations, such as copings or crowns. It is indicated for a screw-retained single tooth or cement-retained single tooth and bridge restorations. It is compatible with the following systems:
• NobelActive (K102436, K071370, K133731): 3.0, 3.5, 4.3, 5.0, 5.5 (3.0, NP, RP, WP)
All digitally designed abutments and/or copings for use with TruBase S are intended to be sent to a TruAbutmentvalidated milling center for manufacture.
TruBase S consists of a two-piece abutment, where the titanium base is a pre-manufactured abutment that will be used to support a CAD/CAM designed superstructure (the second part of the two-piece abutment) that composes the final abutment. The system also includes a TruBase S Screw for fixation to the implant body.
TruBase S abutments are made of titanium alloy conforming to ASTM F 136 Standard Specification for Wrought Titanium-6Aluminum-4Vanadium ELI (Extra Low Interstitial) Alloy for Surgical Implant Applications and are provided in various prosthetic platform diameters (NobelActive 3.0, NP, RP, WP). The TruBase S Screws are composed of titanium alloy per ASTM F136.
They also feature:
- . cylindrical shape
- hexagonal indexing at the apical end of the connection ●
- indexing guide in the cementable portion for coping fitting ●
CAD/CAM customized superstructure that composes the final abutmentis intended to be sent to a TruAbutment-validated milling center to be designed and milled, according to the prosthetic planning and patient clinical situation. The superstructure is cemented to the TruBase S in the lab. Use "RelyX Unicem 2Automix" as an adhesive extra orally to connect.
TruBase S is provided non-sterile therefore must be sterilized after the cementation of the customized superstructure on the TruBase S.
The provided document describes a 510(k) premarket notification for a dental implant abutment, TruBase S. This type of submission focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence to a predicate device, rather than proving novel clinical effectiveness. As such, the information you're looking for regarding AI-specific criteria, clinical study designs, human reader performance, or training set details associated with an AI-driven device is largely not present in this document.
However, I can extract the acceptance criteria and study details relevant to the mechanical performance and substantial equivalence of this medical device.
1. A table of acceptance criteria and the reported device performance
The acceptance criteria for mechanical performance are implicitly set by compliance with ISO 14801:2016 for fatigue testing. The document states that the test results "met the criteria of the standard." For design parameters, the acceptance criteria are substantial equivalence to the predicate device, K201197.
Acceptance Criteria Category | Specific Acceptance Criterion | Reported Device Performance |
---|---|---|
Material | Ti-6Al-4V ELI (ASTM F 136) for Abutment and Screw | Complies: TruBase S abutments are made of titanium alloy conforming to ASTM F 136. TruBase S Screws are composed of titanium alloy per ASTM F136. |
Design Parameters (CAD) | Minimum and Maximum abutment angle (°) : 0~15 | 0~15 |
Minimum and Maximum Cuff Height (mm): 0.5~5.0 | 0.5~5.0 | |
Minimum and Maximum diameter at abutment/implant interface (Ø, mm): 5.0~8.0 | 5.0~8.0 | |
Minimum Thickness (mm): 0.4 | 0.4 | |
Minimum and Maximum length of abutment post (length above the abutment collar/gingival height) (mm): 4.0~6.0 | 4.0~6.0 | |
Mechanical Performance | Fatigue testing according to ISO 14801:2016 requirements | "The results of the above tests have met the criteria of the standard." "The fatigue limit data for all other implant lines demonstrated the construct strengths to be sufficient for their intended use." |
Implant-to-abutment compatibility | "The testing demonstrated implant to abutment compatibility and has established substantial equivalency of the proposed device with predicate devices." (Through dimensional analysis and reverse engineering) | |
Sterilization | End User Steam Sterilization Test according to ISO 17665-1:2006, 17665-2:2009 and ANSI/AAMI ST79:2010. | Leveraged from predicate device (K201197), which performed these tests with results meeting criteria. TruBase S is provided non-sterile and must be sterilized. |
Biocompatibility | Biocompatibility tests according to ISO 10993-1:2009, ISO 10993-5:2009, and ISO 10993-10:2010. | Leveraged from predicate device (K201197), which performed these tests with results meeting criteria. As the materials are the same (Ti-6Al-4V ELI and InCoris Zi), the biocompatibility is assumed to be equivalent. |
2. 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 distinct "test set" in the context of an AI-driven device or clinical study. The testing performed was non-clinical mechanical performance testing on physical devices and based on technical specifications and design parameters.
- Sample Size: For the fatigue testing, the document mentions "worst-case constructs" were subjected to testing, and "the fatigue limit data for all other implant lines demonstrated the construct strengths to be sufficient." However, specific numerical sample sizes for these tests are not provided.
- Data Provenance: The data originates from internal non-clinical testing conducted by the manufacturer or accredited labs for mechanical and material properties. No country of origin is specified for these tests. The nature of these tests is prospective in the sense that they are conducted specifically for the submission, but they are not clinical studies.
3. 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. The device is a physical dental implant abutment, not an AI device that requires expert ground truth labeling for image analysis or diagnostic purposes. The "ground truth" for its performance is established through adherence to engineering standards (ISO 14801) and material specifications (ASTM F 136).
4. Adjudication method (e.g. 2+1, 3+1, none) for the test set
This information is not applicable. Adjudication methods like 2+1 or 3+1 are typically used in clinical trials or studies where human interpretation of data (e.g., medical images) is compared with an AI's output, often involving multiple experts to resolve discrepancies. This device's evaluation relies on objective mechanical and material testing, not human interpretation or 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
This information is not applicable. This device is a physical dental implant abutment and is not an AI-driven diagnostic or assistive device that would participate in an MRMC study.
6. If a standalone (i.e. algorithm only without human-in-the-loop performance) was done
This information is not applicable. This device is a physical dental implant component, not an algorithm.
7. The type of ground truth used (expert consensus, pathology, outcomes data, etc.)
The "ground truth" for this medical device is based on:
- Material Specifications: Adherence to ASTM F 136 for titanium alloy.
- Engineering Standards: Compliance with ISO 14801:2016 for fatigue testing, and ISO 17665-1/2 and ANSI/AAMI ST79 for sterilization.
- Biocompatibility Standards: Compliance with ISO 10993 series.
- Dimensional and Design Parameters: Matching the design limits established by the predicate device and compatible OEM implant lines.
8. The sample size for the training set
This information is not applicable. There is no concept of a "training set" for this physical medical device. Manufacturing processes are based on established engineering principles and quality control, not machine learning training.
9. How the ground truth for the training set was established
This information is not applicable, as there is no training set for this physical medical device.
Ask a specific question about this device
(205 days)
The BEGO Semados® RS/RSX implant is indicated for single or multiple unit restorations on splinted or non-splinted applications both in the upper and lower jaw. This can be achieved by a 2-stage or 1-stage surgical technique in combination with immediate, early or delayed loading on sufficient primary stability and appropriate occlusal loading.
The BEGO Semados® RS/RSX implant 3.0 is only indicated for single unit restorations of the lower lateral, central incisors or upper lateral incisors.
The healing posts are indicated for patients treated with BEGO Semados® RS/RSX implants for the time during healing of the surrounding soft tissue.
The abutments are indicated for patients treated with BEGO Semados® RS/RSX implants as an aid in prosthetic rehabilitation.
PS ITA, PS TTiA and PS TTiA NH are intended to be used for a maximum period of 6 months.
The BEGO Semados® RS/RSX Implant System consists of implants, healing posts and abutments.
BEGO Semados® RS/RSX implants are self-tapping, conical endosseous dental implants made of commercially pure titanium Grade 4. In contrast to the RSX implant family, the RS implant family has a 0.5 mm machined neck region. BEGO Semados® RS/RSX implants are marketed together with cover screws and insertion posts.
The healing posts are sterile packaged Titanium Grade 5 dental healing abutments that are available in two different sizes. Healing posts can be used either to shape the soft tissue after sub-merged healing of an implant (two-stage) or to keep the shape of the soft tissue after having placed the implant (one-stage).
The abutments are prefabricated prosthetic components made of Titanium Grade 5 directly connected to BEGO Semados® implants with Platform Switch design such as BEGO Semados® RS/RSX implants. They are delivered non-sterile but have to be sterilized by the end-user. They serve as an aid in temporary (provisional) and permanent prosthetic rehabilitation. The abutments are used for single or multiple tooth restorations. There are two types of abutments regarding the duration of use: provisional abutments intended for a limited period of ≤ six months and permanent abutments. The abutments are marketed with the compatible prosthesis and a technician screw.
The MultiPlus system consists of the PS MultiPlus abutments, the MultiPlus Titanium abutment, the MultiPlus Healing posts, the MULTI PLUS UNIVERSAL component and various supporting tools. The MultiPlus system is intended for occlusal screw-retained bridge, full dentures and bar constructions in the mandible and maxilla.
The Easy-Con system consists of the PS Easy-Con abutment and the Easy-Con laboratory set. The Easy-Con system is used to retain full supported dentures in the mandible or maxilla on two to four implants.
The provided document is a 510(k) Premarket Notification for the BEGO Semados® RS/RSX Implant System. This type of submission focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence to a legally marketed predicate device, rather than proving the safety and effectiveness of a novel device through extensive clinical trials with pre-defined acceptance criteria.
Therefore, the document does not contain the kind of information requested in your prompt (e.g., acceptance criteria for an AI/ML model's performance, sample sizes for test sets, expert ground truth establishment, MRMC studies, or training set details). The "performance data" section (Section 11) refers to non-clinical testing of the physical implant system, such as biocompatibility, mechanical properties (fatigue, corrosion), and sterilization, typical for traditional medical devices. Section 12 explicitly states that "no human clinical testing was required."
This submission is about demonstrating that a new dental implant system is as safe and effective as existing, legally marketed implant systems, based on similar technology, materials, and non-clinical performance characteristics. It is not an AI/ML device submission.
Thus, I cannot extract the requested information as it is not present in the provided text.
Ask a specific question about this device
Page 1 of 3