Search Results

Air Assist is intended to slide over the outer surface of an endoscope to facilitate endoscopic therapy by providing a manual, reversible method to control the insufflation (air/CO2) so the physician can better maintain an appropriate field of view.

The Gastro Concepts Air Assist Device is a single-use device that is used to aid in maintaining air/CO2 and insufflation during a colonoscopy. The Air Assist, a single-use device, comprises a cylindrical body with a conical-shaped tip and an open channel for endoscope insertion. Positioned against the anus (not inserted into the rectum), it forms a temporary seal, maintaining air/CO2 insufflation leading to adequate colonic distension for enhanced visualization.

The provided text describes a 510(k) premarket notification for the "Gastro Concepts Air Assist" device. However, it does not contain the detailed acceptance criteria and study results typically found in a comprehensive study report for a device relying on artificial intelligence or complex statistical analysis.

The document focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence to a predicate device through bench testing rather than detailed performance metrics against specific acceptance criteria for AI-driven insights. It explicitly states, "No Clinical Testing was required for this product."

Therefore, I cannot provide a table of acceptance criteria and reported device performance, nor can I answer questions related to sample sizes for test or training sets, data provenance, expert ground truth establishment, adjudication methods, MRMC studies, or standalone algorithm performance, as these items are not present in the provided text.

The available information about "performance testing" is limited to bench tests.

Here's what I can extract regarding the performance testing:

Performance Testing (Bench)

The following bench tests were performed:

• Dimensional Testing
• Simulated Use
• Mechanical Properties: Structural integrity, compression and tension strength
• Leak Rate and Sealing Capability

Summary of Study Results:

• The bench testing demonstrated that the Air Assist device was able to withstand forces greater than expected during clinical use.
• The device was successful in reducing the leak rate during simulated colonic insufflation.
• The device meets the requirements of ISO 10993-1 "Biological Evaluation of Medical Devices – Part 1: Evaluation and Testing Within A Risk Management Process."

Key Missing Information (Based on your request categories):

1. Table of acceptance criteria and reported device performance: Not provided. The text only states that the device "meets the requirements" and "was successful" without quantifiable acceptance criteria or specific performance values.
2. Sample size used for the test set and data provenance: Not applicable/Not provided, as no clinical or specific dataset testing is detailed beyond general bench tests.
3. Number of experts used to establish the ground truth for the test set and the qualifications of those experts: Not applicable/Not provided.
4. Adjudication method (e.g. 2+1, 3+1, none) for the test set: Not applicable/Not provided.
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/Not provided. This is not an AI-driven device described in the document.
6. If a standalone (i.e. algorithm only without human-in-the-loop performance) was done: Not applicable/Not provided. This is not an AI-driven device.
7. The type of ground truth used (expert concensus, pathology, outcomes data, etc): Not applicable, as the performance evaluation relies on physical properties and simulated use, not diagnostic "ground truth."
8. The sample size for the training set: Not applicable/Not provided.
9. How the ground truth for the training set was established: Not applicable/Not provided.

In essence, the provided document describes a medical device where substantial equivalence is demonstrated through engineering bench tests and compliance with recognized standards, not through studies involving AI, human readers, or clinical data with expert-established ground truth.

Ask a specific question about this device