Search Filters

Search Results

Found 2 results

510(k) Data Aggregation

    K Number
    K162379
    Date Cleared
    2016-11-16

    (84 days)

    Product Code
    Regulation Number
    888.3070
    Reference & Predicate Devices
    Why did this record match?
    Reference Devices :

    K113174, K031833, K102555, K152457

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

    The CD HORIZON® Spinal System with or without SEXTANT® instrumentation is intended for posterior, non-cervical fixation as an adjunct to following indications: degenerative disc disease (defined as back pain of discogenic origin with degeneration of the disc confirmed by history and radios), spondylolisthesis, trauma (i.e., fracture or dislocation), spinal stenosis, curvatures (i.e., scoliosis, or lordosis), tumor, pseudarthrosis, and/or failed previous fusion.

    Except for hooks, when used as an anterolateral thoracic/lumbar system, the CD HORIZON® Spinal System may also be used for the same indications as an adjunct to fusion.

    With the exception of degenerative disc disease, the CD HORIZON® LEGACY™ 3.5mm rods and the CD HORIZON® Spinal System PEEK rods and associated components may be used for the aforementioned indications in skeletally mature patients as an adjunct to fusion. The 3.5mm rods may be used for the specific pediatric indications noted below.

    When used for posterior non-cervical pedicle screw fixation in pediatric patients, the CD HORIZON® System implants are indicated as an adjunct to treat progressive spinal deformities (i.e., scoliosis, kyphosis) or lordosis) including idiopathic scoliosis, neuromuscular scoliosis, and congenital scoliosis. Additionally, the CD HORIZON® Spinal System is intended to treat pediatric patients diagnosed with the following conditions: spondylolisthesis/ spondylolysis, fracture caused by tumor and/or trauma, pseudarthrosis, and/or failed previous fusion. These devices are to be used with autograft and/or allograft. Pediatric pedicle screw fixation is limited to a posterior approach.

    The CD HORIZON® SPIRE™ Plate is a posterior, single-level, non-pedicle supplemental fixation device intended for use in the non-cervical spine (T1-S1) as an adjunct to fusion in skeletally mature patients. It is intended for plate fixation' attachment to spinous processes for the purpose of achieving supplemental fixation in the following conditions: degenerative disc disease (as previously defined), spondylolisthesis, trauma, and/or tumor.

    In order to achieve additional levels of fixation, the CD HORIZON® Spinal System rods may be connected to the VERTEX® Reconstruction System with the VERTEX® rod connector. Refer to the VERTEX® Reconstruction System Package Insert for a list of the VERTEX® indications of use.

    Device Description

    The CD HORIZON® Spinal System consists of a variety of shapes and sizes of rods, hooks, screws, CROSSLINK® Plates, staples, and connecting components, as well as implant components from other Medtronic spinal systems, which can be rigidly locked into a variety of configurations, with each construct being tailor-made for the individual case. The subject CD HORIZON® Solera™ Spinal System offers dual rod multi-axial screws (DRMAS) that have an opened head. The subject screws offer the ability to place two rods in parallel. The subject DRMAS are provided sterile.

    AI/ML Overview

    The provided text is a 510(k) summary for the Medtronic CD HORIZON® Spinal System. It describes the device's indications for use, comparison to predicate devices, and performance data from mechanical testing and biocompatibility assessments.

    However, the document does not contain information about acceptance criteria or a study that proves the device meets those criteria in the context of an AI/ML medical device.

    The document describes a spinal implant system, not a software or AI/ML device. The "performance data" section refers to mechanical testing (Static Compression, Static Torsion, Compression Fatigue, Axial Grip, Axial Torsional Grip, Flexion Extension Fatigue) and biocompatibility of the physical implant components, not performance metrics like sensitivity, specificity, or accuracy that would be relevant for an AI/ML device.

    Therefore, the requested information specifically related to acceptance criteria and studies proving an AI/ML device meets them, along with details about sample sizes, data provenance, ground truth establishment, expert qualifications, and MRMC studies, cannot be extracted from this document.

    The document primarily focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence of a physical medical device (spinal system) to predicate devices through material properties and mechanical performance.

    Ask a Question

    Ask a specific question about this device

    Why did this record match?
    AI/MLSaMDIVD (In Vitro Diagnostic)TherapeuticDiagnosticis PCCP AuthorizedThirdpartyExpeditedreview
    Intended Use

    The Polaris Spinal System is a non-cervical spinal fixation device intended for immobilization and stabilization as an adjunct to fusion as a pedicle screw fixation system, a posterior hook and sacral/iliac screw fixation system, or as an anterior or anterolateral fixation system. Pedicle screw fixation is limited to skeletally mature patients and for use with autograft and/or allograft. The device is indicated for all the following indications: degenerative disc disease (defined as discogenic back pain with degeneration of the disc confirmed by history and radiographic studies). spondylolisthesis, trauma, (i.e., fracture or dislocation), deformity or curvature (i.e., scoliosis, kyphosis, and/or lordosis), tumor, stenosis, pseudoarthrosis, or failed previous fusion.

    The Ballista/Ballista II instruments are intended to be used with Ballista II/Polaris 5.5mm implants. Cannulated screws and percutaneous rods may be used with the Ballista/Ballista II instruments to provide the surgeon with a percutaneous approach for posterior spinal surgery for the following indications: degenerative disc disease (defined as discogenic back pain with degeneration of the disc confirmed by history and radiographic studies), spondylolisthesis, trauma, (i.e., fracture or dislocation), deformity or curvature (i.e., scoliosis, and/or lordosis), tumor, stenosis, pseudoarthrosis, or failed previous fusion that warrant the use of a non-cervical spinal fixation device intended for use as a pedicle screw fixation system or sacral/iliac screw fixation system. Pedicle screw fixation is limited to skeletally mature patients and for use with autograft and/or allograft.

    The Polaris Spinal System may be used with the instruments in the AccuVision Minimally Invasive Spinal Exposure System to provide the surgeon with a minimally invasive approach for posterior spinal surgery.

    The dominos in the Polaris Spinal System can be used to connect the Polaris Spinal System to the Altius Spinal System, the Array Spinal System, the Biomet Omega21 Spinal System, or the Synergy Spinal System to achieve additional levels of fixation. Please refer to the individual system's Package Insert for a list of the indications for use for each system.

    Device Description

    The Polaris Spinal System is a non-cervical spinal fixation device. The system includes screws, various types and sizes of rods, locking nuts, hooks, lateral connectors, plugs, fixation washers, rod connectors/dominos and various cross connectors. Various instruments are also available for use by the surgeon to facilitate implantation of the device. This submission is a line extension to Polaris Spinal System to add other styles of multiaxial screw, including a screw with translating feature, and to provide the Polaris Spinal System sterile packed.

    AI/ML Overview

    The provided document describes a 510(k) summary for the Biomet Spine Polaris Spinal System - Translation Screw, which is a non-cervical spinal fixation device.

    Here's an analysis of the acceptance criteria and study information:

    1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

    Acceptance CriteriaReported Device Performance
    Mechanical Testing:
    Static compression bending per ASTM 1717-11aMet all mechanical test requirements based on worst-case construct testing.
    Static torsion per ASTM 1717-11aMet all mechanical test requirements based on worst-case construct testing.
    Dynamic compression bending fatigue per ASTM 1717-11aMet all mechanical test requirements based on worst-case construct testing.
    Substantial Equivalence:Reported as substantially equivalent to predicate devices regarding material, design, operational principles, intended use, indications, and fundamental technology.

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

    The document does not specify a "test set" in the context of clinical data for algorithmic performance. The testing performed was mechanical testing of the device hardware.

    • Test Set Sample Size: Not applicable in the context of clinical data or algorithm performance.
    • Data Provenance: Not applicable. The "data" comes from physical mechanical tests conducted on the device components.

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

    Not applicable. Ground truth, in the context of algorithm performance, typically refers to expert-validated clinical diagnoses or outcomes. This submission focuses on mechanical performance data of a physical medical device.

    4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set

    Not applicable. Adjudication methods are relevant for resolving discrepancies in expert opinions for clinical ground truth. Mechanical testing has well-defined pass/fail criteria per ASTM 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

    No, an MRMC comparative effectiveness study was not done. This device is a physical spinal fixation system, not an AI or imaging diagnostic tool.

    6. If a Standalone (i.e., algorithm only without human-in-the-loop performance) Was Done

    No, a standalone algorithm performance study was not done. This submission is for a physical medical device.

    7. The Type of Ground Truth Used (Expert Consensus, Pathology, Outcomes Data, etc.)

    The "ground truth" for the mechanical testing was the established pass/fail criteria defined by ASTM 1717-11a standard test methods for static and fatigue testing of spinal implant constructs in a vertebrectomy model.

    8. The Sample Size for the Training Set

    Not applicable. This device is a physical implant, not an AI algorithm requiring a training set.

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

    Not applicable, as there is no training set for a physical device.

    Ask a Question

    Ask a specific question about this device

    Page 1 of 1