Search Results

EXULT Knee Replacement System is indicated for the treatment of diseases as follows:

· Painful, disabling joint disease of the knee resulting from non-inflammatory degenerative joint disease (including osteoarthritis traumatic arthritis or avascular necrosis) or rheumatoid arthritis.

· Post-traumatic loss of knee joint configuration and function.

• Moderate varus, valgus, or flexion deformity in which the ligamentous structures can be returned to adequate function and stability.

· Correction or revision of unsuccessful osteotomy, arthrodesis, or failure of previous arthroplasty procedure.

EXULT Knee Replacement System is intended for cemented application only.

The purpose of the submission is a line extension of the EXULT Tibial Insert (UC-type) to the EXULT Knee Replacement System (K192507). The UC-type Tibial Inserts are designed based on the design of the other Tibial Inserts of the EXULT Knee Replacement System (PS-type and CR-type). The UC-type, which is ultra-congruent, has high conformity and increased anterior/posterior edge height, which limits anterior/posterior motion instead of a post structure, like the PS-type. The UC-type Tibial Insert matches Femoral Components of one-size up and down. The UC-type Tibial Insert is symmetrical and used in both the right and left knee. It is only used in combination with the Femoral component/Tibial baseplate of the predicate device (K192507).

Here's an analysis of the provided text regarding acceptance criteria and study information:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

Important Note: The document does not provide specific numerical acceptance criteria or numerical reported device performance values for any of these tests. It only states that the device was "evaluated to demonstrate substantial equivalence to the predicate devices" based on these tests.

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

This information is not provided in the document. The text mentions "non-clinical testing" but does not specify sample sizes for materials tested, nor does it refer to patient data (retrospective or prospective) or countries of origin.

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

This information is not applicable and therefore not provided in the document. The device is a knee replacement system (implant), not an AI/software device that requires expert-established ground truth for image interpretation or diagnosis. The tests described are mechanical and material performance tests.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set

This information is not applicable and therefore not provided in the document. As noted above, this is a mechanical device, not an AI/software device involving human reader interpretation.

5. 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

This information is not applicable and therefore not provided in the document. This is a medical device (knee implant), not an AI-assisted diagnostic or treatment planning software.

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

This information is not applicable and therefore not provided in the document. This is a medical device (knee implant), not an AI algorithm.

7. The Type of Ground Truth Used

The "ground truth" for the non-clinical testing of this knee implant system would be the physical and mechanical properties of the device and its predicate, measured according to established international and ASTM standards. For instance, in wear testing, the "ground truth" is the actual material loss measured. In contact pressure testing, it's the measured pressure distribution.

8. The Sample Size for the Training Set

This information is not applicable and therefore not provided in the document. This is a medical device (knee implant), not a machine learning model that requires a training set.

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

This information is not applicable and therefore not provided in the document. As this is not an AI/ML device, there is no training set or ground truth in that context.

Ask a specific question about this device

LOSPA TKR System is intended for use in total knee arthroplasty surgery for the following indications:
· Painful, disabling joint disease of the knee resulting from non-inflammatory degenerative joint disease (including osteoarthritis, traumatic arthritis or avascular necrosis) or rheumatoid arthritis;
· Post-traumatic loss of knee joint configuration and function;
• Moderate varus, valgus, or flexion deformity in which the ligamentous structures can be returned to adequate function and stability:
· Correction or revision of unsuccessful osteotomy, arthrodesis, or failure of previous arthroplasty procedure.
LOSPA TKR System is intended for cemented application only.

EXULT Knee System is intended for the treatment of diseases as follows:
· Painful, disabling joint disease of the knee resulting from non-inflammatory degenerative joint disease (including osteoarthritis, traumatic arthritis or avascular necrosis) or rheumatoid arthritis;
· Post-traumatic loss of knee joint configuration and function;
• Moderate varus, valgus, or flexion deformity in which the ligamentous structures can be returned to adequate function and stability:
· Correction or revision of unsuccessful osteotomy, arthrodesis, or failure of previous arthroplasty procedure.
EXULT Knee System is intended for cemented application only.

The subject devices in this special 510(k) are the surgical instruments for the LOSPA Modular Knee System and EXULT Knee System, and submitted as a line extension of optional instruments for Corentec's FDA-cleared reusable orthopedic knee joint replacement instruments. The subject instruments are part of Corenter' 510(k)-cleared knee product lines and are required to facilitate total knee arthroplasty procedures.

LOSPA Modular Knee System Instruments: Implant specific trials - the design of the connection part of the trials to the instrument has been revised due to customer's needs. Guide, alignment instruments - the design of the cutting guides and alignments instruments have been revised due to customer's needs.

EXULT Knee System Instruments: AP sizer external rotation instrument and cutting block instruments have been developed to facilitate to check in posterior access during the operation based on US surgeon's request.

The provided text does not contain information about the acceptance criteria or a study proving that a device meets acceptance criteria. The document is an FDA 510(k) clearance letter for Corentec Co., Ltd.'s LOSPA TKR System Instrumentation and EXULT TKR System Instrumentation. It primarily discusses the administrative details of the clearance, the indications for use of the devices, and a comparison to legally marketed predicate devices to establish substantial equivalence.

Specifically, the document states:

• No Clinical or Animal Testing: "No clinical or animal testing were required." (Page 6)
• Non-Clinical Testing: "The following non-clinical laboratory testing and/or engineering analysis were performed to determine substantial equivalence: ・ Dimensions measurement testing ・ Assembly testing" (Page 6)

Therefore, I cannot provide the requested information, which requires details about acceptance criteria, device performance studies, sample sizes, expert involvement, ground truth establishment, or multi-reader multi-case studies. The clearance was based on dimensional measurements and assembly testing, not on clinical performance metrics typically associated with acceptance criteria for device efficacy or diagnostic accuracy.

Ask a specific question about this device

LOSPA TKR System is intended for use in total knee arthroplasty surgery for the following indications:

· Painful, disabling joint disease of the knee resulting from non-inflammatory degenerative joint disease (including osteoarthritis, traumatic arthritis or avascular necrosis) or rheumatoid arthritis;

· Post-traumatic loss of knee joint configuration and function;

· Moderate varus, valgus, or flexion deformity in which the ligamentous structures can be returned to adequate function and stability;

· Correction of unsuccessful osteotomy, arthrodesis, or failure of previous arthroplasty procedure.

LOSPA TRK System is intended for cemented application only.

The Additional components being added to the LOSPA TKR System are:

Instrumentation (Tibial Insert Trial) -

The subject LOSPA TKR System components specification inclusions are a line extension of Instrumentation (Tibial Insert trial). The following is the additional components.

A) Instrumentation (Tibial Insert Trial)

A copy of a final tibial prosthesis designed to be used during total knee arthroplasty to determine the correct alignment, size, and fit of the final prosthesis. It is one of a set of trial knee prostheses that match the different anatomical structures of the knee joint, and may be used in conjunction with a knee femoral component trial prosthesis and a tibial baseplate trial prosthesis. This instrument is a reusable device that must be sterilized prior to use.

Additional Tibial Insert Trials are designed based on Tibial Insert Trials of predicate device cleared LOSPA TKR System Instrumentation under K110404 & K130673 & K160157 & K192507 & K200395. There is one eliminated size, 26T of each design (CR and PS), each for left and right sides. For both CR and PS designs, the ranges of dimensions are the same. The components have slightly modified height. Except for the differences of height, lengths are identical to the previously cleared Tibial insert trials. The subject LOSPA TKR System is available in nine proportional sizes.

This Tibial Insert Trials are made of Propylux conforming to ASTM D4101: Standard Classification System and Basic for Specification for Polypropylene Injection and Extrusion Materials.

The provided text describes a 510(k) premarket notification for the LOSPA TKR System, specifically focusing on the inclusion of new instrumentation (Tibial Insert Trial). It does not contain information about acceptance criteria or a study proving the device meets acceptance criteria in the context of performance metrics like sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, or reader improvement.

The document is a regulatory submission for a medical device (knee joint prosthesis instrumentation) and details:

• Device Name: LOSPA TKR System
• Manufacturer: Corentec Co., Ltd.
• Regulatory Classification: Class II, Product Codes JWH, MBH
• Indications for Use: Total knee arthroplasty for specific conditions (osteoarthritis, rheumatoid arthritis, post-traumatic loss of function, moderate varus/valgus/flexion deformity, revision of unsuccessful procedures). Intended for cemented application only.
• Device Description: The submission is for additional instrumentation (Tibial Insert Trial) for the existing LOSPA TKR System. These trials are sized for correct alignment, size, and fit of the final prosthesis, are reusable, and made of Propylux.
• Substantial Equivalence: The device is being submitted as substantially equivalent to previously cleared LOSPA Total Knee System products (K110404, K130673, K160157, K192507, K200395).

The information requested in the prompt (acceptance criteria, study details, sample sizes, ground truth, expert qualifications, adjudication, MRMC studies, standalone performance, training set details) is typically associated with studies proving the clinical or analytical performance of diagnostic or AI-enabled devices. This document pertains to the modification of an existing mechanical prosthetic system, specifically the inclusion of new instrumentation (a trial component), not a diagnostic algorithm or a device requiring such performance studies.

Therefore, I cannot extract the requested information from the provided text because it does not contain data on:

1. Acceptance criteria and reported device performance: No specific performance metrics (e.g., sensitivity, accuracy) are mentioned for the Tibial Insert Trial.
2. Sample size, data provenance: Not applicable for this type of submission which is for mechanical instrumentation.
3. Number/qualifications of experts, adjudication method: Not relevant for this type of device.
4. MRMC study: Not relevant.
5. Standalone performance: Not relevant.
6. Type of ground truth: Not relevant.
7. Training set sample size/ground truth establishment: Not relevant, as this is not an AI/algorithmic device.

Ask a specific question about this device