Search Results

The X-CUBE 70 diagnostic ultrasound system is intended for use by, or by the order of, and under the supervision of, a licensed physician who is qualified for the evaluation of soft tissue and blood flow in the clinical applications of Fetal; Abdominal(renal & GYN/pelvic); Pediatric; Small Organ(breast, testes, thyroid); Neonatal Cephalic; Adult Cephalic; Trans-rectal; Trans-vaginal; Musculo-skeletal(Conventional); Musculo-skeletal(Superficial); Cardiac(adult& pediatric); Peripheral Vessel(PV); and Urology(including prostate).

And, in the imaging modes of 2D(B) mode; Harmonic mode(HAR); M mode; Anatomical M mode; Color Flow Doppler(CF) Mode; Power Doppler(PD) Mode; Directional PD mode; Pulsed Wave Doppler(PWD) Mode; Continuous Wave Doppler(CWD) Mode; High PRF Doppler mode; Tissue Doppler Imaging(TDI) Mode; 3D/4D mode. The X-CUBE 70 is intended to be used in a hospital or medical clinic.

X-CUBE 70 product is an ultrasound imaging system for medical diagnosis. This innovative system platform provides optimal patient diagnosis workflow with the wide flat panel display, ergonomic control panel with easy user interface, optimal image quality.

The information provided about the X-CUBE 70 ultrasound system primarily pertains to its technical specifications and regulatory compliance for medical device safety standards, rather than performance against specific clinical acceptance criteria or a study with clinical endpoints.

The document states: "The subject of this premarket submission, X-CUBE 70, did not require clinical studies to support substantial equivalence." This means that the device was deemed substantially equivalent to a predicate device (X-CUBE 70, K200450) based on non-clinical tests rather than clinical performance trials demonstrating specific acceptance criteria.

Therefore, many of the requested details about acceptance criteria derived from a clinical study, sample size, expert ground truth, and comparative effectiveness studies are not available in the provided text.

Based on the provided information, I can extract the following:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance:

The document describes the X-CUBE 70 as being in conformance with various safety and performance standards for ultrasound equipment. The "acceptance criteria" here relate to meeting these standards for safety and technical specifications, as opposed to clinical performance benchmarks.

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

• Sample Size for Test Set: Not applicable as no clinical study with a "test set" of patient data was conducted or referenced for performance evaluation in this submission. The evaluation was based on non-clinical testing against industry standards.
• Data Provenance: Not applicable for a clinical test set. The data provenance for the non-clinical tests would be from laboratory testing according to the listed standards.

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

• Not applicable, as no clinical ground truth assessment by experts was explicitly mentioned in the context of performance testing for this submission. The compliance was assessed against safety and performance standards by the manufacturer and reviewed by the FDA.

4. Adjudication method for the test set:

• Not applicable due to the absence of a clinical test set requiring expert adjudication.

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. The X-CUBE 70 is a diagnostic ultrasound system and the submission does not describe any AI component or MRMC study.

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

• Not applicable, as the device is an ultrasound system, not a standalone algorithm.

7. The type of ground truth used:

• The "ground truth" for the device's acceptable performance was established through adherence to recognized medical device safety and performance standards (e.g., IEC 60601-1, IEC 60601-1-2, IEC 60601-2-37, AAMI/ANSI/ISO10993-1, AIUM MUS, NEMA UD 2, NEMA UD 3) and comparison to predicates for substantial equivalence. There is no mention of clinical ground truth (e.g., pathology, outcomes data).

8. The sample size for the training set:

• Not applicable. The document does not describe any machine learning or AI component requiring a training set.

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

• Not applicable, as no training set is mentioned in this submission.

Ask a specific question about this device

The X-CUBE 90 diagnostic ultrasound system is intended for use by, or by the order of, and under the supervision of, a licensed physician who is qualified for the evaluation of soft tissue and blood flow in the clinical applications of Fetal; Abdominal(renal & GYN/pelvic); Pediatric; Small Organ(breast, testes, thyroid); Neonatal Cephalic; Adult Cephalic; Trans-rectal; Trans-vaginal; Musculo-skeletal(Conventional); Musculo-skeletal(Superficial); Cardiatric); Peripheral Vessel(PV); and Urology(including prostate).

And, in the imaging modes of 2D(B) mode; Harmonic mode(HAR); M mode; Anatomical M mode; Color Flow Doppler(CF) Mode; Power Doppler(PD) Mode; Directional PD mode; Pulsed Wave Doppler(PWD) Mode; Continuous Wave Doppler(CWD) Mode; High PRF Doppler mode; Tissue Doppler Imaging(TDI) Mode; 3D/4D mode. The X-CUBE 90 is intended to be used in a hospital or medical clinic.

X-CUBE 90 product is an ultrasound imaging system for medical diagnosis. This innovative system platform provides optimal patient diagnosis workflow with the wide flat panel display, ergonomic control panel with easy user interface, optimal image quality.

The provided text describes the Alpinion Medical Systems Co., Ltd. X-CUBE 90 ultrasound system and its equivalence to predicate devices, but it does not include information about acceptance criteria or a study proving device performance in the context of AI/ML.

The document is a 510(k) summary for a traditional medical device (ultrasound system), not an AI/ML-powered device. Therefore, it focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence to previously cleared ultrasound systems based on technical characteristics, indications for use, and compliance with general medical device safety standards.

Here's what can be extracted from the document, with the understanding that the request for AI/ML-specific details cannot be fully met from the provided text:

1. A table of acceptance criteria and the reported device performance

The document does not specify quantitative clinical performance acceptance criteria or report device performance in terms of metrics like sensitivity, specificity, or AUC, which are common for AI/ML devices. Instead, it demonstrates performance by comparing its features and characteristics to legally marketed predicate devices, asserting that it is as safe and effective.

The acceptance criteria are implicitly based on compliance with recognized medical device standards and having equivalent specifications and functionalities to the predicate devices.

Regarding the sections specific to AI/ML devices (points 2-9 in your request), the provided text does not contain this information as it describes a conventional ultrasound system, not an AI/ML powered one.

Therefore, the following cannot be answered from the provided document:

• 2. Sample size used for the test set and the data provenance: Not applicable, as no AI/ML test set is mentioned.
• 3. Number of experts used to establish the ground truth for the test set and the qualifications of those experts: Not applicable.
• 4. Adjudication method (e.g. 2+1, 3+1, none) for the test set: Not applicable.
• 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.
• 6. If a standalone (i.e. algorithm only without human-in-the-loop performance) was done: Not applicable.
• 7. The type of ground truth used (expert consensus, pathology, outcomes data, etc.): Not applicable.
• 8. The sample size for the training set: Not applicable, as no AI/ML training set is mentioned.
• 9. How the ground truth for the training set was established: Not applicable.

Summary of Non-Clinical and Clinical Tests (from the document):

• Summary of Non-Clinical Tests: The X-CUBE 90 was evaluated for biocompatibility, acoustic output, and thermal, electrical, electromagnetic, and mechanical safety. It was found to conform to various medical device safety standards (IEC 60601-1, IEC 60601-1-2, IEC 60601-2-37, AAMI/ANSI/ISO10993-1, AAMI/ANSI/ISO14971, AIUM MUS, NEMA UD 2, NEMA UD 3). Quality management system measures were also applied, including risk management, requirements reviews, design reviews, component verification, integration review, performance testing, safety testing, and design validation.
• Summary of Clinical Tests: The submission explicitly states: "The subject of this premarket submission, X-CUBE 90, did not require clinical studies to support substantial equivalence." This is typical for 510(k) submissions of conventional devices demonstrating equivalence to existing ones.

Ask a specific question about this device