Search Results

The ADAPT for Gamma3 System, when used with the Stryker Navigation System, assists the surgeon to determine the needed size and position of orthopedic implants during femur fracture surgery using the Gamma3 System.

When used in operation the system should be operated only by trained personnel such as surgeons and clinic staff.

In the scope of this 510(k), two medical devices are introduced:

• ADAPT 2.0 for Gamma3 SW – Software (stored on a USB stick as a data carrier) for Gamma3® surgery assistance
• ADAPT Gamma3 DTS Clip – Reference body enabling distal locking assistance with ADAPT 2.0 for Gamma3 SW

ADAPT 2.0 for Gamma3 SW is a software which is designed to be run on the existing Stryker ADAPT® Platform (K141551) and Stryker NAV3 Platform (K162937). The software is based on the existing FluoroMap® 1.0 software which belongs to the predicate device FluoroMap Computer Assisted Surgery System (K103400).

ADAPT 2.0 for Gamma3 SW (when using with specific reference bodies: FluoroDiscs [K103400], ADAPT Clip [K103400], ADAPT Gamma3 DTS Clip [in the scope of this submission]) assists the surgeon with implant alignment, lag screw length determination, lag screw positioning and distal locking during Gamma3® surgery.

ADAPT 2.0 for Gamma3 SW uses fluoroscopic X-ray images taken during the surgical procedure. The software uses the reference bodies to perform registration of the surgical site and to assist the surgeon in the selection and placement of orthopedic implants. The registration is based on the geometry of embedded metal marker beads in the reference bodies. The software detects radiopaque implants and instruments such as nails, K-wires, lag screws and drill sleeves and displays positional information to the surgeon to provide assistance in positioning of implants during Gamma3® surgery.

The ADAPT Gamma3 DTS Clip is used as a reference body enabling distal locking assistance (for Gamma3® Long Nails) with ADAPT 2.0 for Gamma3 SW. The ADAPT Gamma3 DTS Clip consists of a PEEK body and contains radiopaque metal marker beads (DIN 5401 - 2 G20 – 1.3541). For assembly on the Gamma3® Distal Targeting Adjusting Device (part of Gamma3® Distal Targeting System), a specific assembly mechanism is integrated. The software (ADAPT 2.0 for Gamma3 SW) detects the metal marker beads of the assembled ADAPT Gamma3 DTS Clip on X-ray images to enable assistance.

The provided FDA 510(k) clearance letter for "ADAPT for Gamma3" primarily focuses on establishing substantial equivalence to a predicate device and does not contain detailed information about specific acceptance criteria or an in-depth study proving the device meets those criteria, particularly for performance metrics like accuracy, sensitivity, or specificity.

The document states:

• "Different simulated use case scenarios – to verify a system accuracy of 2 mm. These scenarios include saw bone tests and simulated use tests."
• "Testing demonstrated that ADAPT for Gamma3 is equivalent in performance to the predicate device (K103400)."
• "No clinical testing of the ADAPT for Gamma3 System has been conducted."

This implies that the primary performance validation was non-clinical, focusing on achieving a 2mm accuracy in simulated environments and demonstrating equivalence to a predicate device. However, the details of the study design, sample sizes, ground truth establishment, or expert involvement for these performance claims are not provided in this document.

Therefore, many of the requested details cannot be extracted from the given text. Below is an attempt to address the points based only on the provided information, noting where information is missing.

Acceptance Criteria and Study for ADAPT for Gamma3

Based on the provided FDA 510(k) clearance letter, the primary acceptance criterion and the study proving it is rooted in non-clinical testing for system accuracy and equivalence to a predicate device.

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

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

• Sample Size: Not specified in the provided document. The document mentions "Different simulated use case scenarios" and "saw bone tests and simulated use tests" but does not quantify the number of tests or samples.
• Data Provenance: The origin of the data (country, retrospective/prospective) is not specified. It is non-clinical, based on "simulated use case scenarios" and "saw bone tests."

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

• This information is not provided. The ground truth for the 2mm accuracy claim in simulated tests would likely be established through precise measurements in the lab rather than expert human interpretation.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set

• Not applicable as the testing appears to be objective, physical measurements (e.g., assessing 2mm accuracy) rather than subjective expert interpretations requiring adjudication.

5. If a Multi-Reader Multi-Case (MRMC) Comparative Effectiveness Study Was Done

• No, a multi-reader multi-case (MRMC) comparative effectiveness study was not done. The document explicitly states: "No clinical testing of the ADAPT for Gamma3 System has been conducted." This implies no studies involving human readers or their improvement with AI assistance were performed and submitted.

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

• The document implies that standalone performance (e.g., accuracy) was evaluated through "simulated use case scenarios" and "saw bone tests" verifying a 2 mm accuracy. However, this is for the system's underlying capabilities, not necessarily a formal "standalone study" akin to an AI diagnostic device's performance evaluation. The device assists the surgeon, suggesting a human-in-the-loop context for its intended use, but the core 2mm accuracy appears to be a technical, system-centric metric.

7. The Type of Ground Truth Used

• For the 2mm system accuracy, the ground truth would be precise physical measurements from the "saw bone tests and simulated use tests." This is not an expert consensus, pathology, or outcomes data, but rather a directly measured physical accuracy.

8. The Sample Size for the Training Set

• The document does not provide information regarding a training set sample size. This is a 510(k) clearance based on substantial equivalence and non-clinical performance; details on internal development, including AI/software training, are typically not part of the public 510(k) letter unless specifically requested by FDA for novel AI components, which doesn't appear to be the case here. The software is noted to be "based on the existing FluoroMap® 1.0 software."

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

• This information is not provided. (See point 8).

Ask a specific question about this device