Search Results

USTAR II Knee System

1. Metastatic tumor (i.e. osteosarcoma, chondrosarcoma, giant cell tumor or osteoma) where massive resection and transplantation are needed.
2. Severe knee joint damage resulting from trauma where massive resection and transplantation are needed.
3. Non-inflammatory degenerative joint disease such as avascular necrosis, osteoarthritis, or traumatic arthritis.
4. Revision of previously failed total joint arthroplasty, osteotomy, or arthrodesis.
5. Joint instability resulting from excessive bone resection.

For Femoral component, Hinged/ Tibial baseplate, Hinged/ Cemented tibial stem/ Cemented Straight stem, RHS, non coated/ Cemented Curved stem, RHS, non coated/ Cemented Straight stem, RHS/ Cemented Curved stem, RHS/ Tibial Augment: These devices are single use implant and intended for cemented use only.

For Distal Femoral Component, RHS/ Proximal Tibial Component, RHS/ Tibial stem/ Segment Part, RHS/ Segment Part, RHS, Bridge: These devices are single use implant and intended for cementless use only.

USTAR II Knee System, Stem

1. Metastatic tumor (i.e. osteosarcoma, chondrosarcoma, giant cell tumor or osteoma) resulting from trauma where massive resection and transplantation are needed.
2. Severe knee joint damage resulting from trauma where massive resection and transplantation are needed.
3. Non-inflammatory degenerative joint disease such as avascular necrosis, osteoarthritis, or traumatic arthritis.
4. Correction for revision of unsuccessful osteotomy, arthrodesis, or failure of previous joint replacement.
5. Joint instability resulting from excessive bone resection.

Cemented Tibial Stem is a single use implant and intended for cemented use only. Tibial Stem is a single use implant and intended for cementless use only.

USTAR II Hip System

1. Metastatic tumor (i.e. osteosarcoma, chondrosarcoma, giant cell tumor or osteoma) where massive resection and transplantation are needed.
2. Severe knee joint damage resulting from trauma where massive resection and transplantation are needed.
3. Non-inflammatory degenerative joint disease such as avascular necrosis, osteoarthritis, or traumatic arthritis.
4. Revision of previously failed total joint arthroplasty, osteotomy, or arthrodesis.
5. Joint instability resulting from excessive bone resection.

This device is a single use implant and intended for cementless use only.

"United" USTAR II System is used for patients who need a special prosthesis for their particular indication, which may present large quantity of bone loss and deformity associated with previous failed arthroplasty, ligament deficiencies, one tumors resection, or trauma and may require a further operation or reconstruction.

USTAR II System includes two sub-systems, which is "USTAR II Knee System" and "USTAR II Hip System". USTAR II Knee System is designed as modular combinations. It offers a variety of component options for treatment of patients that require femoral component, tibial baseplate and tibial insert. The tibial augment, segment part and stem are provided for patient with more bone resection. USTAR II Hip System is designed as a modular system which is composed Proximal femoral component, Trochanteric claw, and Press-fit, RHS straight/curved stem.

This document is a 510(k) premarket notification for the "USTAR II System" by United Orthopedic Corporation. It focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence to predicate devices, rather than establishing acceptance criteria and conducting a study to prove performance against those criteria in the context of an AI/ML device.

Therefore, the requested information for an AI/ML device (e.g., acceptance criteria for diagnostic performance, sample sizes for test/training sets, expert qualifications, ground truth establishment, MRMC studies, standalone performance) is not applicable to this document.

The document describes a medical device (a knee and hip prosthesis system) and its non-clinical performance testing. It states that "Performance data demonstrate the device is as safe and effective and is substantially equivalent to the legally marketed predicate devices."

Here's what can be extracted regarding the device performance and testing for this non-AI/ML medical device:

1. Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance (Non-AI/ML)

The document does not explicitly state quantitative acceptance criteria in a table format for diagnostic performance, as it's not a diagnostic AI/ML device. Instead, it lists non-clinical performance tests conducted to demonstrate safety and effectiveness and substantial equivalence to predicate devices. The reported performance is that the device "met" or "demonstrates" parity with predicate devices.

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

• Not applicable. This pertains to a physical medical device (prosthesis), not an AI/ML diagnostic algorithm that uses a "test set" of data in the common sense. The testing performed involves mechanical and material properties.

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

• Not applicable. Ground truth establishment by experts is relevant for diagnostic AI/ML systems where human interpretation is the gold standard. For a physical device, performance is evaluated against engineering standards and validated test methods.

4. Adjudication method for the test set

• Not applicable. This concept belongs to the evaluation of human judgment in diagnostic AI/ML studies.

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. MRMC studies are for evaluating how AI assistance impacts human reader performance in diagnostic tasks.

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

• Not applicable. This refers to a diagnostic algorithm's performance in isolation. The USTAR II System is a physical implant.

7. The type of ground truth used

• For the non-clinical tests (e.g., fatigue, wear, endotoxin), the "ground truth" is defined by established engineering and biological standards (e.g., ISO standards, USP pharmacopeial limits). The device is tested against these predefined performance benchmarks.

8. The sample size for the training set

• Not applicable. This device is not an AI/ML system that requires a "training set."

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

• Not applicable.

Ask a specific question about this device

For E-XPE Cup Liner and U-Motion II Acetabular Cup

The device is used for reduction or relief of pain and/or improved hip function in sketally mature patients with the following conditions:

1. Painful, disabling joint disease of the hip from: degenerative arthritis, rheumatoid arthritis, post-traumatic arthritis or late stage avascular necrosis.

2. Revision of previous unsuccessful femoral head replacement, cup arthroplasty or other procedure.

3. Clinical management problems where arthrodesis or alternative techniques are less likely to achieve satisfactory results.

4. Correction of functional deformity.

5. Treatment of nonunion femoral neck and trochanteric fracture of the proximal femur with head involvement that is unmanageable using other techniques.

This device is a single use implant and intended for cementless use only.

For E-XPE Cemented Cup

1. Non-inflammatory degenerative joint disease such as osteoarthritis, avascular necrosis, ankylosis, and painful hip dysplasia:

2. Inflammatory degenerative joint disease such as rheumatoid arthritis;

3. Correction of function deformity;

4. Revision procedures where other treatments or devices have failed;

5. Treatment of nonunion and femoral neck fractures of the proximal femur with head involvement that is unmanageable using other techniques.

This device is a single use implant and intended for cemented use only.

For E-XPE Acetabular Components

The subject E-XPE Acetabular Components includes U-Motion II E-XPE Cup Liner and E-XPE Cemented Cup. U-Motion II E-XPE Cup Liner includes 0° and 20° hood designs, which are available in 28 mm, 32 mm, 36 mm and 40 mm inner diameter (ID). The 28 mm liners fit the acetabular cups with outer diameter (OD) ranging from 44-46 mm, the 32 mm liners fit the acetabular cups ranging from 46-50 mm, the 36 mm liners fit the acetabular cups ranging from 50-70 mm, and the 40 mm liners fit the acetabular cups ranging from 56-70 mm.

The E-XPE Cemented Cup is design for cemented use and assembled with a PMMA Spacer and an X-ray marking wire. The cement mantle is built within the outer surface of acetabular cup. The PMMA Spacer is designed for cement fixation with a uniform cement thickness and the X-ray marking wire is designed for X-ray image identification purpose. E-XPE Cemented Cups are available in a range of sizes to fit varying anatomical requirements.

For U-Motion II Acetabular Cup

The indication for use, materials, cup hole types, size distribution, sterilization method, safety and effectiveness of subject device are identical to predicate device (K122185) except the locking design. The subject device are available in sizes from 44 mm through 80 mm outer diameter in 2 mm increments.

This is a medical device submission, specifically a 510(k) summary, for E-XPE Acetabular Components and U-Motion II Acetabular Cups. The document focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence to predicate devices rather than proving performance against specific acceptance criteria for a novel AI/software function. Therefore, the questions related to AI/software performance, such as sample size for test/training sets, expert qualifications, and MRMC studies, are not applicable to this document.

However, I can extract information regarding non-clinical performance tests conducted to establish safety and effectiveness for these medical implants.

Here's a breakdown of the relevant information:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance:

The document doesn't provide a table of pre-defined acceptance criteria with specific numerical targets. Instead, it lists the types of non-clinical tests performed to demonstrate safety and effectiveness and states that the "Performance data demonstrate the device is as safe and effective and is substantially equivalent to the legally marketed predicate devices." This implies that the devices met the expected performance benchmarks or were comparable to the predicate devices in these tests.

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

• Sample Size: Not specified in this 510(k) summary for any of the non-clinical tests. Medical device testing often uses specific numbers of samples based on industry standards, but these details are not provided here.
• Data Provenance: The document does not specify the country of origin of the data. As these are non-clinical (laboratory) tests, the concept of "retrospective or prospective" as applied to clinical studies is not directly relevant.

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

This question is not applicable. The document describes laboratory-based non-clinical performance tests for an orthopedic implant, not an AI/software device that requires expert ground truth labeling.

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

This question is not applicable. Adjudication methods are typically used in clinical studies or for establishing ground truth for AI model training/testing, which is not the subject of 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:

This question is not applicable. This is not an AI-assisted device.

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

This question is not applicable. This is not an AI/software device.

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

This question is not applicable in the context of an AI/software device. For these orthopedic implants, the "ground truth" and "acceptance criteria" are implied by the established standards and performance expectations for medical devices of this type, which are assessed through the specified non-clinical tests (e.g., measuring locking strength, wear, impingement, material properties).

8. The sample size for the training set:

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

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

This question is not applicable. This is not a machine learning or AI device.

Ask a specific question about this device

The device is indicated for use in hip arthroplasty in patients with the following conditions:

1. A severely painful and/or disabled joint from osteoarthritis, traumatoid arthritis or congenital hip dysplasia.
2. Avascular necrosis of the femoral head.
3. Acute traumatic fracture of the femoral head or neck.
4. Failed previous hip surgery.

This device is a single use implant and intended for cemented stem which is designed for cemented use only.

UNITED U2 femoral head is a modification of the cleared UNITED femoral head (K994078, K022520, K111546, K122504 and K152439) which is intended to use in primary or revision total/hemi hip arthroplasty. U2 femoral heads include three series of products: U2 Femoral head, U2 Femoral head, 3/4 polished and U2 Femoral head, 4/5 polished.

U2 femoral heads provide five different diameters of 22 mm, 26 mm, 32 mm and 36 mm. 22 mm is available in +0, +3, +6 and +9 mm of neck length, 26 mm is available in -2, +0. +3, +6 and +9 mm of neck length and 28 mm to 36 mm are available in -3, +0, +2.5. +5, +7.5 and +10 mm of neck length. A variety of diameters and neck lengths are available for various patient anatomies, adjustment of the tension of the ligaments, and reconstruction of the center of the physiological head of the femur.

U2 femoral heads is design for compatibility with various types of UNITED Hip Stem (K062978, K003237, K003237, K151316, K111546, K111546, K152530, K123550, K132207). For total hip replacement, U2 femoral heads can be used in conjunction with U2 Acetabular Cup Liner (K050262), XPE Cup Liner (K111546), U2 HA/Ti Plasma Spray Cup (K050262, K121777), U2 Ti Plasma Spray Cup (K050262, K121777), U2 Ti Porous Coated Cup (K111546) and U-Motion II Acetabular System (K122185, K132455). For hemi hip arthroplasty, U2 femoral heads can be used with U2 Bipolar Implant (K152439).

The provided document describes the FDA 510(k) summary for the U2 Femoral Head prosthesis. This document does not describe the acceptance criteria and study proving device meets the acceptance criteria for an AI/ML device. Instead, it focuses on the substantial equivalence of a physical medical device (a femoral head implant) to previously cleared predicate devices.

Therefore, the requested information elements (acceptance criteria, device performance table, sample sizes, data provenance, expert ground truth, adjudication methods, MRMC study, standalone performance, training set details) are not available in the provided text.

The document only states the following:

Performance Data:

• Non-clinical Performance:
  • Tests were conducted to evaluate safety and effectiveness.
  • Tests included:
    • Disassembly force between U2 femoral head and stem component.
    • Range of Motion.
    • Bacterial endotoxin testing, which met the endotoxin limit specified in USP .
  • The performance data demonstrated the device is as safe and effective and is substantially equivalent to the legally marketed predicate devices.
• Clinical Performance Data/Information: None provided as a basis for substantial equivalence.

This information pertains to the physical and biological properties of the implant, not to the performance of an AI/ML algorithm.

Ask a specific question about this device