Search Results

Indications for Use for Zirconia Implants, Cover Screw and Healing Abutment:
The Neodent Implant System is intended to be surgically placed in the bone of the upper or lower jaw to provide support for prosthetic devices, such as artificial teeth, to restore chewing function. It may be used with singlestage or two-stage surgical procedures, for single or multiple unit restorations, and may be loaded immediately when good primary stability is achieved and with physiological occlusal loading. Multiple teeth applications can be rigidly splinted.

Indications for Use for Zirconia Bases:
The Zirconia Base is an abutment placed over Neodent Zirconia Implants in order to provide support for patient-specific prosthetic restorations, such as copings or crowns. It may be used for cement- or screw retained single unit restorations. All digitally designed copings and/or crowns to be used with the Neodent Zirconia Base Abutment System are intended to be sent to Straumann for manufacture at a validated milling center.

• Intended for single use;
• Zirconia implants provided sterile via Ethylene Oxide; Zirconia Base abutments are provided sterile but require end user sterilization via moist heat following cementation of the restoration and before use
• All devices of Zirconia Implant System are manufactured of Y-TZP (Yttrium-stabilized zirconium dioxide), except for the Zirconia Implant Cover Screw and the Basal Screw, which is manufactured of titanium alloy according to ASTM F136 standard;
• ZiLock prosthetic interface with internal indexer;
• Apically tapered implant with trapezoidal thread profile;
• Implant provided with sand-blasted, acid etched surface finish to facilitate osseointegration.
• The final finished Zirconia Base abutments are two-piece abutments composed of a zirconia base bottom-half bonded to a CAD-CAM zirconia top-half.

The provided text describes a medical device submission (K201491) for the Neodent Implant System - Zirconia Implant System to the FDA. This document focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence to predicate devices, rather than presenting a standalone study with specific acceptance criteria and performance results for a new AI/software device.

Therefore, the requested information about acceptance criteria, detailed device performance, sample sizes for test/training sets, ground truth establishment, expert adjudication, and MRMC studies cannot be extracted from this document as it pertains to a different type of medical device submission (dental implants and their components) and regulatory pathway (510(k) for substantial equivalence).

The document details the comparison of the subject device (Neodent Implant System - Zirconia Implant System) to predicate and reference devices in terms of indications for use, technological characteristics, and performance data from various tests. However, these are evaluations against established standards and comparisons to existing devices, not metrics of an AI's performance.

Here's what can be extracted, though it doesn't directly answer the detailed questions about AI performance criteria:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance:

The document doesn't provide a table of acceptance criteria for software performance in the typical sense (e.g., sensitivity, specificity, AUC). Instead, it presents a comparison of technological characteristics and states that the "tested subject devices exhibit a level of performance equivalent to that reviewed for the predicate devices" in mechanical testing.

Here's a summary of the performance data presented, which implies meeting an "equivalent" performance to predicates rather than specific numerical acceptance criteria for a new software.

No information is available regarding points 2-9 as they are specific to AI/software device studies to establish performance against a ground truth. This document is a 510(k) summary for a physical dental implant system and components, establishing substantial equivalence to existing devices.

Ask a specific question about this device