Search Results

The Parafleet SC 014 / Parafleet SC 035 is intended to dilate stenoses in the iliac. femoral, iliofemoral, popliteal, infrapopliteal, and renal arteries, and for the treatment of obstructive or synthetic arteriovenous dialysis fistulae.

This device is also indicated for stent dilatation post-deployment in the peripheral vasculature.

The Parafleet balloon dilatation catheter family consists of Parafleet SC 014, Parafleet SC 018 and Parafleet SC 035 PTA balloon catheter. The PTA (OTW type) device is an over the wire (OTW) peripheral balloon catheter, specially designed for Percutaneous Transluminal Angioplasty (PTA). The Parafleet SC catheter is available in working lengths of 40cm, 90cm, 120cm, 150cm and 200cm, with balloon diameters ranging from 1.25mm to 12.0mm. The Parafleet features an outer tube and inner tube lumen shaft ending in a Y-hub manifold with luer lock fittings. One lumen is used for inflation of the balloon and accessed via the side leg port. The second lumen, starting at the straight entry port, allows access to the distal tip of the catheter for a standard 0.014 inch / 0.018 inch / 0.035 inch guide wire insertion. The catheter is sterilized with EO and for single use only. The design of this dilatation catheter does not incorporate a lumen for distal dye injections or distal pressure measurements.

The BrosMed Medical Co., Ltd.'s Parafleet SC 014, Parafleet SC 018, and Parafleet SC 035 PTA Balloon Dilatation Catheters underwent various performance tests to ensure substantial equivalence to predicate devices and suitability for their intended use.

1. Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance:

The document lists several performance tests conducted, implying that the acceptance criteria for these tests were met to demonstrate substantial equivalence. The reported device performance is that "The test results met all acceptance criteria, were same or similar to the predicate devices, and ensure that the Parafleet SC 014 / Parafleet SC 018 / Parafleet SC 035 PTA Balloon Dilatation Catheter design and construction are suitable for its intended use."

While specific numerical acceptance criteria and precise performance values are not provided in the summary, the general categories of tests and their "met" status serve as the reported performance against inferred acceptance criteria derived from FDA guidance and predicate device characteristics.

Here’s a table summarizing the types of tests (representing categories of acceptance criteria) and the reported performance:

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

The document does not specify the exact sample sizes used for each of the performance tests. The data provenance (e.g., country of origin, retrospective/prospective) for these tests is also not explicitly stated in the provided text. However, it's typical for such bench and biocompatibility tests to be conducted in a laboratory setting by the manufacturer (BrosMed Medical Co., Ltd. in China) or a contract research organization.

3. Number of Experts and Qualifications for Ground Truth:

This section is not applicable to the provided document. The submission pertains to a medical device's performance characteristics (e.g., mechanical, material, biocompatibility) rather than an AI/ML-driven diagnostic or prognostic device that would require expert-established ground truth for interpretation of images or patient data. The tests performed are objective, physical, and chemical evaluations.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set:

This section is not applicable for the same reasons as point 3. No subjective interpretation requiring adjudication is mentioned for the performance testing of these physical medical devices.

5. Multi-Reader Multi-Case (MRMC) Comparative Effectiveness Study:

This section is not applicable as the device is a PTA Balloon Dilatation Catheter, not an AI-assisted diagnostic tool. Therefore, there is no human-in-the-loop performance or comparison with AI assistance.

6. Standalone Performance (Algorithm Only):

This section is not applicable as the device is a physical medical device, not an algorithm or AI system.

7. Type of Ground Truth Used:

The "ground truth" for the performance tests in this context is established by objective engineering specifications, material standards, and regulatory guidance documents (e.g., FDA guidance 'Peripheral Percutaneous Transluminal Angioplasty (PTA) and Specialty Catheters - Premarket Notification (510(k)) Submissions, Guidance for Industry and FDA Staff' and ISO 10993-1 for biocompatibility).

For example:

• Dimensional verification checks against the device's design specifications.
• Balloon Rated Burst Pressure tests against the manufacturer's specified burst pressure and regulatory safety limits.
• Biocompatibility testing assesses against established biological safety endpoints defined by ISO standards.

8. Sample Size for the Training Set:

This section is not applicable as the device is a physical medical device and does not involve machine learning or a "training set."

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

This section is not applicable for the same reasons as point 8.

Ask a specific question about this device

The Finesse Injectable™ PTA Balloon Catheter is indicated for Percutaneous Transluminal Angioplasty (PTA) in the peripheral vasculature, including iliac, femoral, popliteal and renal arteries, and for the treatment of obstructive lesions of native or synthetic arteriovenous dialysis fistulae.

The Finesse InjectableTM PTA Balloon Dilatation Catheter is an over-the-wire balloon catheter for peripheral indications. The device features a semi-compliant balloon combined with a low-profile tip. The catheter is compatible with 0.014" (0.36 mm) guidewires and has a hydrophilic coating over its distal coaxial segment to facilitate advancement of the catheter to the treatment site. The Finesse Injectable™ PTA Balloon Dilatation Catheter has a working length of 150 cm, and is available with balloon working lengths of 20, 40, 60, 100, and 225 mm. There are two radiopaque marker bands located within the balloon working length (one proximal and one distal). These radiopaque marker bands, in conjunction with fluoroscopy, aid in the placement of the catheter's balloon segment. There is one additional radiopaque marker located distal of the exit holes to aid in locating their position relative to a guiding sheath distal tip. The catheter construction consists of a catheter shaft with two independent lumens extending along its length. One lumen is for inflation and deflation of the angioplasty balloon. The other lumen is for placement of the guidewire and injection of fluids via the catheter's exit holes that are positioned proximal to the balloon. The proximal portion of the catheter comprises a hub that includes an extension tube with a female luer-lock port connected to a balloon inflation/deflation lumen, and a stopcock with female luer-lock port for fluid/contrast injection attached to the side port of a Touhy-Borst adapter that is in communication with the guidewire lumen.

The Finesse™ Injectable PTA Balloon Dilatation Catheter is intended for Percutaneous Transluminal Angioplasty (PTA) in the peripheral vasculature. The acceptance criteria and supporting study details are as follows:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance:

The document primarily focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence to a predicate device rather than presenting specific quantitative acceptance criteria for each test. However, it states that "Results from all tests were acceptable" and that the data "demonstrate that the Finesse Injectable™ PTA Balloon Dilatation Catheter is substantially equivalent to the predicate devices."

Based on the information provided, a table of acceptance criteria and reported device performance would look like this:

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

The document does not explicitly state the sample sizes used for each specific test mentioned under "Performance Data." It refers to "Design verification and validation" and "the following tests were conducted," implying a series of laboratory and bench tests.

• Sample size: Not specified.
• Data provenance: The performance data is generated through "Design verification and validation" testing. This typically implies prospective, internal laboratory testing conducted by the manufacturer (Summa Therapeutics, LLC). There is no indication of country of origin for the data or if it was retrospective.

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

This information is not applicable. The study is a device performance evaluation (bench testing and biocompatibility), not a clinical study involving the establishment of ground truth by experts for diagnostic or treatment effectiveness.

4. Adjudication method for the test set:

This information is not applicable, as it is a device performance study and not a study requiring expert adjudication of clinical outcomes or images.

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 information is not applicable. This is a 510(k) submission for a physical medical device (balloon catheter), not an AI-assisted diagnostic or therapeutic device. Therefore, no MRMC study or AI assistance evaluation was conducted.

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

This information is not applicable, as the device is not an algorithm or AI system.

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

This information is not applicable in the context of this device performance study. The "ground truth" for this device's evaluation is defined by engineering specifications, material standards, and established test methodologies for evaluating the physical and mechanical properties of balloon catheters and their biological safety.

8. The sample size for the training set:

This information is not applicable. This is a device performance study, not a machine learning or AI algorithm development that would involve training sets.

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

This information is not applicable, as there is no training set for this type of device submission.

Ask a specific question about this device

The JADE PTA Balloon Dilatation Catheter is indicated for Percutaneous Transluminal Angioplasty in the peripheral vasculature, including iliac, femoral, popliteal, infra-popliteal, and renal arteries, and for the treatment of obstructive lesions of native or synthetic arteriovenous dialysis fistulae. This device is also indicated for post-dilation of balloon expandable and self-expanding stents in the peripheral vasculature.

The JADE Percutaneous Transluminal Angioplasty (PTA) Balloon Dilatation Catheters are designed for peripheral indications and include both Rapid Exchange (RX) and Over-The-Wire (OTW) designs. The over-the-wire design permits the use of standard 0.018 inch and 0.035 inch guidewires respectively (hereafter referred to as 18 OTW version and 35 OTW version), and the rapid exchange design permits the use of standard 0.018 inch guidewires (hereafter referred to as 18 RX version) as shown in Table 1 below. The JADE PTA balloon dilatation catheter is made of a minimally compliant material with a rated burst pressure of 16 atmospheres for 7.0mm diameters, 18 atmospheres for 4.5-6.0mm diameters and 20 atmospheres for 1.5-4.0mm diameter. Two radiopaque marker bands (Platinum/Iridium) are positioned within the balloon shoulder, and for balloons of working length 180-240mm, two more marker bands (four marker bands in total) are positioned in the middle of the balloon. A hydrophilic lubricious coating is applied to the outside surface of distal section of the catheter. A Silicone coating is applied to wire lumen surface.

The provided text describes a 510(k) submission for a medical device, the JADE PTA Balloon Dilatation Catheter, and its performance testing to demonstrate substantial equivalence to a predicate device. However, it does not pertain to an Artificial Intelligence/Machine Learning (AI/ML) device.

Therefore, the information required to answer the question about the acceptance criteria and study proving an AI/ML device meets those criteria, specifically concerning data provenance, expert ground truth, MRMC studies, or standalone algorithm performance, is not present in the provided document.

The document focuses on in vitro performance tests and biocompatibility tests for a physical medical device (a balloon catheter), not a software-driven diagnostic or AI-assisted system.

Specifically, the document lists performance tests such as:

• Visual Inspection
• Dimensional Verification
• Balloon Preparation, Deployment, and Retraction
• Balloon Rated Burst Pressure (including in-stent)
• Balloon Fatigue (including in-stent)
• Balloon Compliance
• Balloon Inflation and Deflation Time
• Catheter Bond Strength
• Tip Pull Strength
• Flexibility and Kink
• Torque Strength
• Marker Band Radiopacity
• Coating Integrity
• Particulate Evaluation

And biocompatibility tests:

• Cytotoxicity
• Intracutaneous reactivity
• Sensitization
• Acute systemic toxicity
• Hemocompatibility (Hemolysis, Complement activation, Partial thromboplastin time, Platelet and leukocyte counts, In vivo thromboresistance)
• Pyrogenicity
• Genotoxicity (bacterial mutagenicity test, in vitro mouse lymphoma Assay)

It concludes that "The test results met all acceptance criteria," but it does not specify what those numerical criteria were, only the types of tests performed. It certainly does not provide any details related to AI/ML device validation.

Ask a specific question about this device

The Pacific Plus PTA Catheter is intended to dilate stenoses in the illiofemoral, popliteal, infrapopliteal, and renal arteries, and for the treatment of obstructive lesions of native or synthetic arteriovenous dialysis fistulae. This device is also indicated for stent postdilatation in the peripheral arteries.

The Pacific Plus PTA catheter is an Over the Wire (OTW) peripheral balloon catheter, specifically designed for percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTA) in stenosed vessel segments. The OTW catheter is used to guide the balloon to the stenosed vessel segment. The balloon is then inflated to dilate the vessel.

The catheter is a coaxial dual lumen device. The lumen marked "WIRE" is the central lumen of the catheter, which terminates at the distal tip. This lumen is used to pass the catheter over a guidewire with a maximum outer diameter of 0.018 in (0.46 mm). The lumen marked "BALLOON" is the balloon inflation lumen, which is used to inflate and deflate the dilatation balloon with a mixture of contrast medium and saline solution.

The Pacific Plus PTA catheter is available in balloon diameters 4.0 mm - 7.0 mm, and balloon lengths from 20 mm to 300 mm, with 90 cm, 150 cm, and 200 cm catheter lengths. The distal section of the catheter includes a lubricious hydrophilic coating.

The provided text describes a 510(k) premarket notification for the Pacific Plus PTA Catheter. This document is a regulatory submission for a medical device and, therefore, focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence to a predicate device rather than presenting a study to prove a device meets specific clinical performance acceptance criteria in the manner one might find for a novel diagnostic or AI-driven decision support tool.

The "acceptance criteria" in this context refer to the benchmark performance of the predicate device and relevant industry standards for similar devices. The "study" proving the device meets these criteria is the bench testing and biocompatibility evaluation performed.

Here's an analysis of the provided information based on your request, keeping in mind the nature of a 510(k) submission for a catheter:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

Note: For a device like a PTA catheter, "acceptance criteria" are typically defined by engineering specifications, safety standards, and performance characteristics demonstrated by equivalent predicate devices, rather than clinical metrics like sensitivity/specificity for diagnostic AI. The "reported device performance" are the results of bench tests confirming these specifications are met or are comparable to the predicate.

• Ability to withstand rated burst pressure.
• Resistance to fatigue under repeated inflation/deflation.
• Specific balloon compliance (expansion profile).
• Acceptable inflation/deflation times. | - Balloon Preparation, Deployment and Retraction: Demonstrated to function as intended.
• Balloon Rated Burst Pressure: Met specified pressure limits, comparable to predicate.
• Balloon Fatigue: Demonstrated acceptable durability.
• Balloon Compliance: Within expected range, comparable to predicate.
• Balloon Inflation/Deflation Time: Within acceptable limits. |
  | Mechanical Integrity | - Sufficient bond strength between components.
• Acceptable catheter flexibility and kink resistance.
• Adequate torque strength for navigation.
• Integrity of hydrophilic coating. | - Catheter Bond Strength and tip pull test: Met specified strength requirements.
• Catheter Flexibility and Kink Test: Demonstrated acceptable flexibility and kink resistance.
• Catheter Torque Strength: Met specified torque limits.
• Catheter coating Integrity: Confirmed to be intact and functional. |
  | Safety | - Absence of unacceptable particulate matter.
• Biocompatibility (cytotoxicity, pyrogenicity, systemic toxicity, sensitization, intracutaneous reactivity, hemocompatibility). | - Particulate Evaluation: Met acceptable limits.
• Biocompatibility Testing: All tests (Cytotoxicity, Pyrogenicity, Systemic Toxicity, Sensitization, Intracutaneous Reactivity, Haemocompatibility - Hemolysis, Complement Activation, Partial Thromboplastin Time (PTT), Thromboresistance) were passed, concluding the device is biocompatible for its intended use. |
  | Sterility | Sterility assurance level and method. | Same sterility assurance level and method of sterilization as predicate. |
  | Packaging | Suitable packaging materials. | Similar packaging materials to predicate. |

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

• Sample Size for Test Set: The document does not specify a numerical sample size for the bench tests. It refers to "internal risk analysis procedures" that determined the extent of testing. For medical device bench testing, the sample size is typically determined by statistical methods or established industry standards to ensure sufficient confidence in the results for each specific test (e.g., a certain number of catheters are tested for burst pressure, fatigue, etc.).
• Data Provenance: The data is "internal" research and development data, generated by Medtronic Vascular, Inc. through their bench testing and biocompatibility assessments. This is not clinical data, but rather engineering and laboratory testing data. The country of origin of the data is implicitly the USA, where Medtronic is headquartered and the submission was made to the FDA. The data is prospective in the sense that the tests were conducted specifically to support this 510(k) submission.

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

• Not Applicable in the traditional sense. For a PTA catheter, "ground truth" for bench testing is established by engineering specifications, validated test methods (e.g., ASTM, ISO standards), and the performance characteristics of the legally marketed predicate device. This is not a situation where human experts are adjudicating clinical images or patient outcomes to establish ground truth for an AI algorithm. The "experts" involved would be Medtronic's R&D engineers, quality assurance personnel, and regulatory affairs specialists who designed the tests, conducted them, and interpreted the results against established standards and predicate performance. Their qualifications would be in engineering, materials science, and medical device regulations.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set

• Not Applicable. As explained above, this is not a study requiring adjudication by experts to establish ground truth. The results of the bench tests are objectively measured against predefined acceptance criteria (e.g., a specific burst pressure, a certain bond strength, pH levels for biocompatibility assays).

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. This type of study is specifically relevant for diagnostic AI or decision support systems where human interpretation of data is a key component. The Pacific Plus PTA Catheter is an interventional medical device, not a diagnostic AI tool, so an MRMC study comparing human readers with and without AI assistance is not applicable and was not performed.

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

• No. This question is relevant to AI algorithms. The Pacific Plus PTA Catheter is a physical medical device. The "performance" being evaluated is its physical and mechanical characteristics in a standalone bench testing environment, but this is distinct from an AI algorithm's standalone performance.

7. The Type of Ground Truth Used

• For bench testing, the "ground truth" consisted of engineering specifications, international standards (e.g., ISO 10993-1), and the established performance characteristics of the legally marketed predicate device (K123358) and reference devices. These benchmarks define what constitutes acceptable performance for each test. For biocompatibility, the ground truth is established by conformity to the biological safety limits specified in ISO 10993-1.

8. The Sample Size for the Training Set

• Not Applicable. This question is relevant to machine learning/AI models. The Pacific Plus PTA Catheter does not involve a "training set" in the context of AI. The development of the catheter relies on engineering design principles, material science, and prior knowledge from predicate devices, not on training an algorithm with a dataset.

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

• Not Applicable. As there is no AI training set, this question is not relevant.

In summary, the provided document details a 510(k) submission for a physical medical device. The "study" demonstrating performance involved extensive bench testing and biocompatibility evaluation against engineering specifications, international standards, and the characteristics of predicate devices. This is fundamentally different from the evaluation of an AI-driven diagnostic or decision support system, which would involve clinical studies, ground truth established by expert consensus or pathology, and various performance metrics like sensitivity, specificity, or AUC.

Ask a specific question about this device

The Jade PTA Balloon Dilatation Catheter is indicated for Percutaneous Transluminal Angioplasty in the peripheral vasculature, including iliac, femoral, poplited, infra-popliteal, and renal arteries, and for the treatment of obstructive lesions of native or synthetic arteriovenous dialysis fistulae. This device is also indicated for post-dilation of balloon expandable and self-expanding stents in the peripheral vasculature.

The JADE PTA Balloon Dilatation Catheters is now also available as an over-the-wire balloon catheter for peripheral indications. The balloon diameters range from 1.5mm to 6.0mm and balloon lengths range from 20mm to 240mm, with 90cm, 150cm and 200cm catheter lengths. The balloon material is made of a minimally compliant material with a rated burst pressure of 18 atmospheres for 5.0-6.0mm and 20atm for 1.5-4.0mm. Hydrophilic lubricious coatings are applied to the distal section of the catheter. The shaft of the catheter is composed of a proximal shaft and a distal shaft. The distal shaft is composed of a distal outer tube and tri-extrusion inner tube with a balloon welded to both tubes at the distal tip to aid in tracking through vasculature. The proximal shaft is composed of a proximal outer tube and tri-extrusion inner tube that are bonded to a female luer connector, with the proximal outer tube allowing for proximal pushability with a smooth transition to the distal shaft. The inner lumen of the catheter accepts a maximum 0.014 inch (0.36mm) guidewire. The guidewire enters the catheter tip and advances coaxially out the hub guidewire lumen. Two radiopaque marker bands are positioned within the balloon shoulder, and for balloons of working length 180-240mm, two more marker bands (four marker bands in total) are positioned in the middle of the balloon. One marked section, for the 90cm catheter working length, or two marked sections, for the 150cm and 200cm catheter working lengths, are located on the proximal shaft to indicate catheter position relative to the tip of the guiding catheter or introducer sheath. The Y-type hub is bonded on the proximal end of the catheter at the entrance to the inflation lumen and the guidewire lumen. The design of this dilatation catheter does not incorporate a lumen for distal dye injections or distal pressure measurements.

The provided text describes the 510(k) summary for the Jade PTA Balloon Dilatation Catheter, which is a medical device. This type of submission is for proving "substantial equivalence" to a legally marketed predicate device, rather than proving that an AI/algorithm-based device meets specific performance criteria.

Therefore, the document does not contain the information requested regarding acceptance criteria and the study that proves an AI/algorithm device meets those criteria. The provided text details performance testing for a physical medical device (a balloon catheter) to demonstrate its safety and effectiveness, and its equivalence to a predicate catheter.

Specifically, the document does not address any of the following points relevant to an AI/algorithm-based device study:

• 1. A table of acceptance criteria and the reported device performance (for an AI/algorithm)
• 2. Sample sized used for the test set and the data provenance
• 3. Number of experts used to establish the ground truth for the test set and the qualifications of those experts
• 4. Adjudication method (e.g. 2+1, 3+1, none) for the test set
• 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
• 6. If a standalone (i.e. algorithm only without human-in-the-loop performance) was done
• 7. The type of ground truth used (expert consensus, pathology, outcomes data, etc.)
• 8. The sample size for the training set
• 9. How the ground truth for the training set was established

The performance data mentioned in the document (Visual Inspection, Marker Band Radiopacity, Dimensional Verification, etc.) are all related to the physical characteristics and functionality of the balloon catheter, not an AI algorithm.

Ask a specific question about this device