Search Results

The M7/M7T Diagnostic Ultrasound System is applicable for adults, pregnant women, pediatric patients and neonates. It is intended for use in gynecology, obstetric, abdominal, pediatric, small parts (breast, thyroid), neonatal cephalic, transcranial, cardiac, transvaginal, transrectal, peripheral vascular, urology, orthopedic, and musculoskeletal (conventional and superficial), intraoperative and transesophageal(cardiac) exams.

M7/M7T Diagnostic Ultrasound System is a general purpose, portable/mobile, software controlled, ultrasound diagnostic system. Its function is to acquire and display ultrasound images in B-Mode, M-Mode, PW-Mode, CW mode, Color-Mode, Color M-Mode, Power/Dirpower Mode, TDI mode or the combined mode (i.e. B/M-Mode).This system is a Track 3 device that employs an array of probes that include linear array, convex array and phased array with a frequency range of approximately 2.5 MHz to 10.0 MHz.

Here's an analysis of the provided text regarding acceptance criteria and study information for the M7/M7T Diagnostic Ultrasound System:

Summary of Device Performance Study Information

The provided 510(k) summary for the M7/M7T Diagnostic Ultrasound System is for a general-purpose ultrasound device. As such, it primarily focuses on establishing substantial equivalence to predicate devices and adherence to safety and performance standards rather than presenting a clinical study with specific acceptance criteria related to diagnostic accuracy.

The document indicates that the device has been evaluated for:

• Acoustic output
• Biocompatibility
• Cleaning and disinfection effectiveness
• Thermal, electrical, and mechanical safety

It states that the device conforms to applicable medical safety standards, including UD 2, UD 3, IEC 60601-1 series, UL 60601-1, ISO14971, ISO 10993-1, IEC62304, and IEC60601-2-18.

Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

Since this is a filing for a general-purpose ultrasound system based on substantial equivalence, there are no specific diagnostic accuracy acceptance criteria or performance metrics (like sensitivity, specificity, AUC) reported in this summary. The "performance" being demonstrated here is primarily the device's adherence to relevant safety and performance standards, and its technological characteristics being comparable to predicate devices.

Specific Study Information Not Provided in this Document:

Based on the provided text, the following information is not available:

1. Sample size used for the test set and the data provenance (e.g., country of origin of the data, retrospective or prospective): No clinical test set or data from a diagnostic performance study is mentioned. The evaluation is focused on engineering and safety standards.
2. Number of experts used to establish the ground truth for the test set and the qualifications of those experts: Not applicable as no clinical ground truth study is described.
3. Adjudication method (e.g., 2+1, 3+1, none) for the test set: Not applicable as no clinical test set is described.
4. If a multi-reader, multi-case (MRMC) comparative effectiveness study was done, and the effect size of how much human readers improve with AI vs. without AI assistance: Not applicable. This document describes a general diagnostic ultrasound system, not an AI-powered diagnostic tool.
5. If a standalone (i.e., algorithm only without human-in-the-loop performance) was done: Not applicable. This is not an AI device.
6. The type of ground truth used (expert consensus, pathology, outcomes data, etc.): Not applicable as no clinical ground truth study is described.
7. The sample size for the training set: Not applicable as this is not an AI/machine learning device.
8. How the ground truth for the training set was established: Not applicable as this is not an AI/machine learning device.

Conclusion from the Document:

The conclusion states that the "Intended uses and other key features are consistent with traditional clinical practices, FDA guidelines and established methods of patient examination. The design, development and quality process of the manufacturer confirms with 21 CFR 820, ISO 9001 and ISO 13485 quality systems. The device conforms to applicable medical device safety standards. Therefore, the M7/M7T Diagnostic Ultrasound System is substantially equivalent with respect to safety and effectiveness to devices currently cleared for market."

This heavily implies that due to the nature of the device (a general-purpose ultrasound system) and the regulatory pathway chosen (510(k) substantial equivalence), the "study" demonstrating its meeting of acceptance criteria consists of:

• Verification and validation against engineering and safety standards (as listed above).
• Bench testing and performance verification to ensure the device functions as intended (e.g., imaging modes, frequency ranges).
• Comparison of its intended uses and technological characteristics to already cleared predicate devices.

There is no mention of a clinical trial or a study assessing the diagnostic accuracy or efficacy of the M7/M7T Diagnostic Ultrasound System in this summary. Such studies are typically not required for general-purpose ultrasound systems cleared via the 510(k) pathway when substantial equivalence to existing devices is established based on technical and functional similarities and adherence to recognized standards.

Ask a specific question about this device

The DC-8/DC-8 PRO/DC-8 CV/DC-8 EXP/DC-8S Diagnostic Ultrasound System is applicable for adults, pregnant women, pediatric patients and neonates. It is intended for use in fetal, abdominal, pediatric, small organ (breast, thyroid, testes), neonatal cephalic, adult cephalic, trans-rectal, trans-vaginal, musculo-skeletal (conventional, superficial), cardiac adult, cardiac pediatric, peripheral vessel and urology exams.

DC-8/DC-8 PRO/DC-8 CV/DC-8 EXP/DC-8S Diagnostic Ultrasound System is a general purpose, mobile, software controlled, ultrasound diagnostic system. Its function is to acquire and display ultrasound images in B-Mode, M-Mode, PW-Mode, CW mode, Color-Mode, Color M-Mode, Power/Dirpower Mode, TDI mode, 4D mode or the combined mode (i.e. B/M-Mode).This system is a Track 3 device that employs an array of probes that include linear array, convex array and phased array with a frequency range of approximately 3 MHz to 10.0 MHz.

The provided text is a 510(k) summary for the Shenzhen Mindray Bio-medical Electronics Co., LTD DC-8/DC-8 PRO/DC-8 CV/DC-8 EXP/DC-8S Diagnostic Ultrasound System. This document focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence to predicate devices and adherence to medical safety standards rather than establishing new performance criteria through clinical studies.

Therefore, the document does NOT contain information regarding:

• Specific acceptance criteria framed as quantitative metrics (e.g., sensitivity, specificity, accuracy).
• Details of a study proving the device meets acceptance criteria in terms of clinical performance.
• Sample sizes used for test or training sets for an AI/algorithm.
• Data provenance, number or qualifications of experts, or adjudication methods for establishing ground truth related to clinical performance.
• Multi-reader multi-case (MRMC) comparative effectiveness studies or effect sizes for human readers with/without AI assistance.
• Standalone algorithm performance studies.
• The type of ground truth used as it relates to clinical performance studies.
• The sample size for the training set or how ground truth was established for a training set.

The document primarily outlines the device's technical specifications, intended uses, and lists applicable safety and electrical standards it conforms to. It states that the device has been evaluated for "acoustic output, biocompatibility, cleaning and disinfection effectiveness as well as thermal, electrical and mechanical safety" and found to conform with applicable medical safety standards.

However, based on the provided text, I can infer the "acceptance criteria" and "study" in a regulatory context, which is demonstrating substantial equivalence to predicate devices and compliance with recognized standards.

Here's a breakdown of what can be extracted based on that understanding:

1. Table of "Acceptance Criteria" and "Reported Device Performance":

In the context of a 510(k) submission for a diagnostic ultrasound system like this, the "acceptance criteria" are not reported as specific performance metrics (like sensitivity/specificity) but as conformance to established safety and performance standards, and substantial equivalence to legally marketed predicate devices. The "reported device performance" is the statement of conformity.

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

The document does not detail specific clinical studies with test sets, sample sizes, or data provenance (country, retrospective/prospective) for proving diagnostic performance. The evaluations mentioned are primarily for safety, electrical, and mechanical conformity.

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

Not applicable, as no described clinical performance study with a test set requiring expert-established ground truth.

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

Not applicable.

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. The device described is a general diagnostic ultrasound system, not an AI-powered diagnostic algorithm aiding human readers.

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

Not applicable. This is a diagnostic ultrasound system, not a standalone algorithm.

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

Not applicable in the context of clinical diagnostic performance. For technical evaluations, the "ground truth" would be the specifications and requirements defined by the applicable standards (e.g., standard measures for acoustic output, material properties for biocompatibility testing).

8. The sample size for the training set:

Not applicable, as no described AI/algorithm training process.

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

Not applicable.

Ask a specific question about this device

The DP-20 and DP-30 Digital Ultrasonic Diagnostic Imaging System is applicable for adults, pregnant women, pediatric patients and neonates. It is intended for use in fetal, abdominal, intraoperative(abdominal, thoracic, and vascular), pediatric, small organ(breast, thyroid, testes), neonatal cephalic, trans-rectal, trans-rectal, trans-vaginal, musculo-skeletal(conventional, superficial), cardiac(adult, pediatric), peripheral vascular and urology exams.

The DP-20 and DP-30 Digital Ultrasonic Diagnostic Imaging System are general purpose, portable/mobile {with mobile ultrasound trolley}, software controlled, ultrasonic diagnostic systems. Its function is to acquire and display ultrasound data in B-Mode, M-Mode, or their combined mode B+M Mode. The systems are Track 1 device that employs an array of transducers including linear array and convex array. The frequency range of DP-20 is approximately 2.0 MHz to 10.0 MHz and that of DP-30 is approximately 2.0 MHz to 12.0 MHz.

The provided text is a 510(k) Pre-market Notification for the DP-20 and DP-30 Digital Ultrasonic Diagnostic Imaging System. It focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence to already-marketed predicate devices rather than proving performance against specific acceptance criteria through clinical studies. Therefore, much of the requested information, particularly regarding detailed performance metrics, study design, and ground truth establishment, is not present in this document.

Here's a breakdown of what can and cannot be extracted from the provided text:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

This document does not provide a table of acceptance criteria with specific performance metrics (e.g., sensitivity, specificity, accuracy) for a new device's functionality. Instead, it relies on demonstrating that the DP-20 and DP-30 systems are substantially equivalent to predicate devices (Mindray DP-6900 Digital Ultrasonic Diagnostic Imaging System (K090912), M5 Diagnostic Ultrasound System (K102991), and M7 Diagnostic Ultrasound System (K103677)).

The "performance" described is in terms of general characteristics and adherence to safety standards.

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

The document does not describe any specific clinical or performance test set (dataset of cases) used to establish quantitative performance metrics. The demonstration of safety and effectiveness relies on adherence to established engineering and medical device standards, and comparison to predicate devices, rather than a prospective clinical study with a defined test set of patients/images.

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

Not applicable. No ground truth establishment by experts for a specific test set is mentioned, as the submission is not based on a clinical performance study with a new algorithm or diagnostic aid requiring such validation.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set

Not applicable. No clinical test set and subsequent adjudication method are described in this 510(k) summary.

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 an ultrasound imaging system, and the submission does not involve an AI algorithm or a comparative effectiveness study of human readers with or without AI assistance.

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

Not applicable. This is a standalone ultrasound imaging system, not an algorithm. Its "standalone" performance is assessed at the system level through adherence to safety and operational standards and comparison to predicate devices.

7. The Type of Ground Truth Used

Not applicable in the context of a new diagnostic algorithm. The "ground truth" implicitly referred to is the established safety and performance of predicate ultrasound systems and compliance with international and national safety standards.

8. The Sample Size for the Training Set

Not applicable. This document is for a medical device (ultrasound system), not an AI algorithm requiring a training set.

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

Not applicable for the reasons mentioned above.

Ask a specific question about this device