Search Results
Found 5 results
510(k) Data Aggregation
(200 days)
Zirconia Implants:
The Neodent Implant System is intended to be surgically placed in the bone of upper or lower jaw to provide support for prosthetic devices, such as artificial teeth, to restore chewing function. It may be used with single-stage 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 occlusion loading. Multiple teeth applications can be rigidly splinted. The implants with length of 5 mm (short implants) may be used only with two-stage surgical procedures. The recommended healing time before loading is between 10 to 12 weeks.
Zi Transmucosal Cover Screw and Healing:
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 single-stage 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.
Zi Transmucosal Provisional Coping:
The Neodent Implant System is intended for surgical procedures in maxilla or mandible, providing support for prosthetic devices such as artificial teeth, to restore chewing function. It may be used with single-stage or two-stage procedures, for single- or multi-unit restorations, and may be loaded immediately when good primary stability is achieved and with appropriate occlusal loading.
Zi Transmucosal Abutment Replacement Screw:
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 single-stage or two-stage procedures, for single or multiple unit restorations, and may be loaded immediately when good primary stability is achieved and with appropriate occlusal loading.
Zi Transmucosal Universal Base:
The Universal Ceramic Base Zi Transmucosal 5.0 is an abutment placed over Neodent Zi Transmucosal 5.0 Ceramic Implant System in order to provide support for custom-made 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.
Zirconia Base for Bridge:
The Zirconia Base for Bridge is an abutment placed over Neodent Zirconia Implants in order to provide support for custom-made prosthetic restorations. It may be used for cement or screw-retained multi-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.
Zirconia Base C:
The Zirconia Base C is an abutment placed over Neodent Zirconia Implants in order to provide support for customized prosthetic restorations, such as copings or crowns. It may be used for single-unit restorations that are screw- or cement-retained in esthetic areas over implants installed in the maxilla or mandible. All copings and/or crowns digitally designed for use with the Titanium Base C are to be designed using Sirona inLab software or Sirona CEREC Software and manufactured using a Sirona CEREC or inLab MC X or MC XL milling unit.
This premarket notification includes new ceramic devices into Neodent Implant System, which are compatible with Zirconia Implant System. The Zirconia Implants and Abutments proposed on this submission are similar to devices already cleared in previous submissions of Neodent Implant System – Zirconia Implant System, according to predicate devices described above. This submission intends to expand the portfolio with new solutions and diameter, in order to provide more treatment options to the customers.
The Zirconia Implants are manufactured in Zirconia Y-TZP and are available in Bone Level (BL) or Tissue Level (TL or Transmucosal) configurations. The Zirconia Implants (BL) are available in a diameter of 5.0 mm and lengths in a range of 8 to 13 mm. The Zi Transmucosal Implants (TL) are available in a diameter of 5.0 mm and lengths in a range of 5 to 11.5 mm.
The Zi Transmucosal Healing and Cover Screw are temporary abutments manufactured in PEEK and used during the healing phase. They are compatible with the Zi Transmucosal Implants Ø5.0. The Zi Transmucosal Healing Abutment is available in the heights of 2 and 3.5mm.
The Zi Transmucosal Provisional Coping is a temporary abutment made of polycarbonate (PC) and has a double function: used for molding procedures or production of provisional restoration.
The Zi Transmucosal Abutment Replacement Screw is a prosthetic component manufactured in titanium alloy and used to fix the fix the Zi Transmucosal Base to the Zi Transmucosal Implant.
The Zi Transmucosal Universal Base is a two-piece abutment of base and top-half prosthetic structure to provide support for customized single-unit restorations over Zi Transmucosal Implant (TL). The base is manufactured in Zirconia Y-ZTP and used with a patient-specific top-half prosthetic structure. The two-piece abutment has a cementable portion of 4mm and is available with gingival heights of 0.3, 1.0 and 1.5 mm. The top-half prosthetic structure to be used with Zi Transmucosal Universal Base must be designed and milled in a Straumann Validated Milling center, using the following restoration materials and dimensions:
Material: IPS e.max CAD HT, Associated Material 510(k): K132209, Minimum wall thickness: 0.9 mm, Maximum angulation: 30°
Material: IPS e.max CAD LT, Associated Material 510(k): K132209, Minimum wall thickness: 0.9 mm
Material: N!ce, Associated Material 510(k): K171773, Minimum wall thickness: 1.0 mm
Material: IVOCLAR Multilink cement, Associated Material 510(k): K130436, Minimum wall thickness: N/A
Material: Zirconia N!ce® LT, Associated Material 510(k): K222836, Minimum wall thickness: 0.4 mm
Material: Zirconia N!ce® HT, Associated Material 510(k): K222836, Minimum wall thickness: 0.4 mm
Material: Zirconia N!ce® XT, Associated Material 510(k): K222836, Minimum wall thickness: 0.4 mm
Material: PMMA N!ce, Associated Material 510(k): K071548, Minimum wall thickness: 0.7 mm
Material: Panavia—Kuraray Cement, Associated Material 510(k): K150704, Minimum wall thickness: N/A, Maximum angulation: N/A
The Zi Base for Bridge is a two-piece abutment of base and top-half prosthetic structure to provide support for customized multi-unit restorations over Zirconia Implants (BL). The base is manufactured in Zirconia Y-ZTP and used with a patient-specific top-half prosthetic structure. The two-piece abutment has a cementable portion of 4mm and is available with gingival heights of 1.5, 2.5 and 3.5 mm. The top-half prosthetic structure to be used with Zi Base for Bridge must be designed and milled in a Straumann Validated Milling center, using the following restoration materials and dimensions:
Material: Zirconia N!ce® LT, Associated Material 510(k): K222836, Minimum wall thickness: 0.4 mm, Maximum angulation: 30°
Material: Zirconia N!ce® HT, Associated Material 510(k): K222836, Minimum wall thickness: 0.4 mm
Material: Zirconia N!ce® XT, Associated Material 510(k): K222836, Minimum wall thickness: 0.4 mm
Material: PMMA N!ce, Associated Material 510(k): K071548, Minimum wall thickness: 0.7 mm
Material: Panavia—Kuraray Cement, Associated Material 510(k): K150704, Minimum wall thickness: N/A, Maximum angulation: N/A
The Zi Base C is a two-piece abutment of base and top-half prosthetic structure to provide support for customized single-unit restorations over Zirconia Implants (BL). The base is manufactured in Zirconia Y-ZTP and used with a patient-specific top-half prosthetic structure. The two-piece abutment has a cementable portion of 4mm and is available with gingival heights of 1.5, 2.5, 3.5 and 4.5 mm. The top-half prosthetic structure to be used with Zi Base C must be designed and milled in a Sirona InLab Validated Workflow, using the following restoration materials and dimensions:
Material: IPS e.max CAD, Associated Material 510(k): K132209, Minimum wall thickness: 0.9 mm, Maximum angulation: 20°
Material: IVOCLAR Multilink cement, Associated Material 510(k): K130436, Minimum wall thickness: N/A, Maximum angulation: N/A
All these abutments have an internal connection with the implants (ZiLock) and the prosthetic platform is identical for all subject devices described in this submission. They are intended for single use and provided sterile via Ethylene Oxide method, along with undergoing moist heat sterilization after end-user customization.
The provided FDA 510(k) clearance letter and its associated summary for the Neodent Implant System - Zirconia Implant System contain extensive information about the device, its intended use, and comparisons to predicate devices. However, it does not include specific acceptance criteria with numerical thresholds directly stated within the tables, nor does it detail a study that directly proves the device meets such criteria in terms of performance metrics like sensitivity, specificity, or image quality assessments.
Instead, the submission focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence to predicate devices through various tests, implying that if the new device performs similarly to or better than previously cleared devices, it meets the necessary standards. The performance testing section describes the types of tests conducted (e.g., dynamic fatigue, torsion, insertion, pull-out, and software validation), but it does not present clear quantitative acceptance criteria or the specific performance results in a comparative table format.
Therefore, many of the requested fields cannot be directly extracted from the provided text as they pertain more to the performance evaluation of AI/software in interpreting medical images, which is not the primary focus of this dental implant submission.
Here's an attempt to answer the questions based on the available information, noting where information is not explicitly provided in the document:
Acceptance Criteria and Device Performance Study for Neodent Implant System - Zirconia Implant System
The FDA 510(k) summary for the Neodent Implant System - Zirconia Implant System focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence to predicate devices through a combination of bench testing, software validation, MRI compatibility, biocompatibility, and sterilization validation. It does not present specific quantitative acceptance criteria or performance metrics directly from a comparative study in the way one might expect for an AI/software-based medical device (e.g., sensitivity, specificity thresholds). Instead, the "acceptance criteria" are implicitly met by demonstrating that the proposed devices perform at a level substantially equivalent to legally marketed predicate devices under standardized testing conditions.
1. A table of acceptance criteria and the reported device performance
As mentioned, explicit numerical acceptance criteria and reported device performance in a comparative table (e.g., for diagnostic accuracy) are not provided in this 510(k) summary. The summary indicates that tests were conducted according to relevant ISO standards and FDA guidance, and the results demonstrated that the subject devices exhibit a level of performance substantial equivalent to the predicate and reference devices.
Below is a conceptual table based on the types of tests mentioned, noting that specific numerical acceptance criteria and performance data are not detailed in the provided text.
Acceptance Criteria Category (Implicit) | Standard/Guidance | Reported Device Performance (Summary) |
---|---|---|
Dynamic Fatigue Strength | ISO 14801, FDA Guidance (Class II Special Controls) | Demonstrated a level of performance substantial equivalent to predicate and reference devices in identical conditions. |
Torsion Strength | Not specified | Adequate torsion strength in accordance with recommended IFU installation torque. |
Insertion Torque | Not specified | Evaluated insertion torque in sawbones material (Bone type I, II, III, IV). (Specific values not given). |
Implant Surface Area & Pull-Out Strength | Not specified | Greater surface area compared to reference devices; higher resistance values in Pull Out Test. |
Software Validation (Sirona Digital Workflow) | Not specified | Accuracy requirement was met; critical design parameters (min wall thickness, max angulation) respected and monitored. |
MRI Compatibility | K182620, FDA Guidance | MR conditional labeling from K182620 is applicable; safe for scanning under previously established parameters. |
Biocompatibility | ISO 10993-1, ISO 10993-18, ISO 10993-5, FDA Guidance | Subject devices are equivalent in material and manufacturing processes to predicates; no new issues raised; no additional testing required. |
Sterilization Validation (Ethylene Oxide) | ISO 11135:2014 | Validated to a Sterility Assurance Level (SAL) of 1x10⁻⁶; residuals below max allowable limits per ISO 10993-7. |
Sterilization Validation (Moist Heat) | ISO 17665-1 | Validated using parameters described in IFU. |
Endotoxin Test | ANSI/AAMI ST72:2011, ISO 11737-3, US Pharmacopeia chapter 85 | Results |
Ask a specific question about this device
(175 days)
The BLUEDIAMOND IMPLANT is intended to be surgically placed in the maxillary or mandibular molar areas for the purpose providing prosthetic support for dental restorations (Crown, bridges, and overdentures) in partially or fully edentulous individuals. It is used to restore a patient's chewing function in the following situations and with the clinical protocols:
- Delaved loading
- Immediate loading when good primary stability is achieved and with appropriate occlusal loading.
For the BLUEDIAMOND IMPLANTS with a Thread Length of 5mm,
It is indicated for fixed or removable reconstruction in situations of moderate to severely atrophic jawbone and with adequate bone quality that allows primary stability after implant insertion, where a longer implant cannot be placed due to limited vertical bone height. The recommended healing time before loading is between 10 to 12 weeks.
It is specifically recommended for: - Fixed partial dentures/splinted units (one implant per unit)
- Pontic cases in combination with at least one longer implant
- Fully edentulous cases with at least one 5 mm Short Implant in combination with 2 longer implants in the anterior region and at least four total implants
The BLUEDIAMOND IMPLANT is a dental implant body system made of CP Ti Grade 4 with the surface treated by SLA method. It is intended to be placed in the maxillary or mandibular areas to restore masticatory function.
It has different thread lengths depending on the diameter and length. The Implanted length of the device is the length that is implanted into the bone, including the length from the thread to the shoulder, which is the non-threaded part.
The Gingival (Cuff) area of the device has grooves; the bottom of the grooves indicate the implantable length.
The BLUEDIAMOND IMPLANT is consisted of the following components.
BLUEDIAMOND IMPLANT Cuff Type: The BLUEDIAMOND IMPLANT is a dental implant body system made of CP Ti Grade 4 with the surface treated by SLA method. It is intended to be placed in the maxillary or mandibular areas to restore masticatory function.
Material: CP Ti Grade 4 of ASTM F67
Dimension (mm):
- Normal Thread Ø 4.0 x 9.0, 11.0, 13.0, 15.0 (7.0, 9.0); Ø 4.4 x 7.0, 9.0, 11.0, 13.0, 15.0 (5.0, 7.0, 9.0); Ø 4.7 x 7.0, 9.0, 11.0, 13.0, 15.0 (5.0, 7.0, 9.0)
- Deep Thread Ø 4.4 x 9.0, 11.0, 13.0, 15.0 (5.0, 7.0, 9.0); Ø 4.8 x 7.0, 9.0, 11.0, 13.0, 15.0 (5.0, 7.0, 9.0); Ø 5.1 x 7.0, 9.0, 11.0, 13.0, 15.0 (5.0, 7.0, 9.0)
Diameter X Total Length (Thread Length): - Normal Thread Ø 4.0: 8.0, 9.0, 10.0, 11.0 (1.0, 2.0); Ø 4.4: 7.0, 8.0, 9.0, 10.0, 11.0 (1.0, 2.0); Ø 4.7: 7.0, 8.0, 9.0, 10.0, 11.0 (1.0, 2.0)
- Deep Thread Ø 4.4: 8.0, 9.0, 10.0, 11.0 (1.0, 2.0); Ø 4.8: 7.0, 8.0, 9.0, 10.0, 11.0 (1.0, 2.0); Ø 5.1: 7.0, 8.0, 9.0, 10.0, 11.0 (1.0, 2.0)
Implanted Length (Thread to Shoulder Height): 2.0, 3.0, 4.0
Gingival (Cuff) Height: Not Found
The BLUEDIAMOND IMPLANTs are compatible to abutments of The BLUEDIAMOND IMPLANT System from K182448, K192614, K210161, K203808, K233450.
The provided text is an FDA 510(k) summary for a dental implant device (BLUEDIAMOND IMPLANT). It focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence to predicate devices, rather than an AI/ML medical device. Therefore, it does NOT contain the specific information required to answer your prompt, such as:
- Acceptance Criteria for AI/ML Performance: The document does not describe performance metrics like sensitivity, specificity, AUC, or other measures typically used for AI/ML models. Instead, it focuses on physical and material properties, and mechanical performance (fatigue, pull-out).
- Study Proving Device Meets Acceptance Criteria for AI/ML: No AI model training, validation, or testing is described. The "performance test" section refers to fatigue tests and pull-out tests, which are engineering tests for the physical implant, not for an AI algorithm.
- Sample Sizes for Test Set (AI/ML): Not applicable, as there's no AI/ML test set.
- Data Provenance (AI/ML): Not applicable.
- Number of Experts/Qualifications (AI/ML Ground Truth): Not applicable.
- Adjudication Method (AI/ML Ground Truth): Not applicable.
- MRMC Study (AI/ML): Not applicable.
- Standalone Performance (AI/ML): Not applicable.
- Type of Ground Truth (AI/ML): Not applicable.
- Sample Size for Training Set (AI/ML): Not applicable.
- How Ground Truth for Training Set was Established (AI/ML): Not applicable.
The document primarily discusses:
- Device Description: Material (CP Ti Grade 4), surface treatment (S.L.A), dimensions, components.
- Indications for Use: Placement in maxillary/mandibular molar areas for prosthetic support, delayed and immediate loading protocols, specific recommendations for 5mm thread length implants.
- Substantial Equivalence: Comparison of the BLUEDIAMOND IMPLANT to a primary predicate device (ARi ExCon Implant System) and several reference devices based on design, dimensions, material, surface treatment, sterilization, shelf life, and features.
- Non-Clinical Testing: Biocompatibility, pyrogen/endotoxin testing, sterilization validation, shelf life, modified surface treatment evaluation, and performance test (fatigue test in accordance with ISO 14801, and pull-out testing), and MR compatibility.
In summary, the provided text describes a physical dental implant device and its regulatory submission to the FDA, not an AI/ML-driven medical device. Therefore, it does not contain the information requested about AI acceptance criteria, performance studies, or ground truth establishment.
Ask a specific question about this device
(200 days)
Indications for Use for Helix Short Implant:
The Neodent Implant System is recommended for surgical procedures on maxilla or mandible bones. It provides support for prosthetic components such as artificial teeth, thus restoring the chewing function. It may be used with single-stage or two-stage procedures, for single or multiple unit restorations, and may be loaded immediately when good primary stability is achieved and with appropriate occlusal loading.
Indications for Use for Mini Straight, Angled Abutment and screws:
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 single-stage or two-stage procedures, for single or multiple unit restorations, and may be loaded immediately when good primary stability is achieved and with appropriate occlusal loading.
Indications for Use for Helix Short Attachment:
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 single stage procedures, for single or multiple unit restorations, and may be loaded immediately when good primary stability is achieved and with appropriate occlusal loading.
Indications for Use for Helix Short Healing Abutment:
This product is used for the maintenance of soft tissue, during the bone integration stage of Neodent implants to be rehabilitated with the late loading technique. The Healing Abutment may be used in the implant installation surgery or the reopening surgery (second surgical stage).
Indications for Use for Helix Short Cover Screw:
This product is used for the maintenance of soft tissue, during the bone integration stage of Neodent implants to be rehabilitated with the late loading technique. The Cover Screw must remain intragingival, preventing the growth of tissue over the implant platform. The Cover Screw takes place in the conical region of the implant interface.
Indications for Use for Temporary Abutment for Helix Short Implant
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 single stage procedures, for single or multiple unit restorations, and may be loaded immediately when good primary stability is achieved and with appropriate occlusal loading. Temporary Abutments are installed over Helix Short Implants and to provide support for prosthetic structures for up to 6 months.
Indications for Use for Helix Short Titanium Base:
The Helix Short Implant Titanium base that is placed over Neodent dental implants to provide support for customized prosthetic restorations, such as copings and crowns. It is indicated for single- and multiple-structure restorations, screw- or cement-retained on implants installed in the maxilla or mandible. All digitally-designed copings and/or crowns to be used with the Neodent Titanium Base System must be sent to Straumann for manufacture at a validated milling center.
- All the subject devices are intended for single use;
- The subject implants are provided sterile via gamma irradiation and the subject abutments are provided sterile via Ethylene Oxide to an SAL of 1x10-9;
- The subject implants are manufactured of Commercially Pure Titanium (Grade 4), the subject abutments, prosthetic screws and abutment screws are manufactured of Titanium alloy Ti-6Al-4V ELI (ASTM F136) and the restorations placed onto Helix Short Titanium Bases are made of various top half materials.
- The subject implants have a wide cone prosthetic interface with an internal hexagon for short implants lengths available from 4.0 to 7.0; cylindrical shape with double threads and conical apex with three helical flutes for diameters from 3.75 to 7.0mm.
- The implants are provided in two different surfaces: Neoporos: Sand blasted and acid etched, and Acqua: Hydrophilic surface aggregated to the rough surface obtained by double treatment: abrasive blasting and acid subtraction.
- The Helix Short Implant Titanium Base abutments is used as two-piece abutment, where the base is premanufactured from titanium alloy and the top half is created via burn out coping or a digital workflow with CAD/CAM at a validated milling center. The final top half can be created from Ticon, Coron, Zerion LT, IPS e.max, or PMMA. The top half and base pieces are cemented together to form the final abutment.
Here's an analysis of the acceptance criteria and supporting studies for the Neodent Implant System - Helix Short Implant System, based on the provided text:
1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance
The FDA 510(k) summary does not explicitly present a table of specific numerical acceptance criteria alongside reported performance for each test. Instead, it describes what was tested and states that the results "met the acceptance criteria" or demonstrated "equivalent performance." We can infer the general acceptance criterion from the study descriptions.
Acceptance Criteria (Inferred) | Reported Device Performance |
---|---|
Mechanical Testing: | |
Dynamic Fatigue Test (per ISO 14801): Equivalent fatigue strength to predicate devices. | The tested subject devices exhibit a level of performance equivalent to that reviewed for the predicate devices. |
Torsion Test (static torsional loading): Meet acceptance criteria. | The results met the acceptance criteria. |
Insertion Test: Evaluate insertion torque in various bone types. | Performed to evaluate the insertion torque of the Helix Short System when it is inserted in bones type I, II, III, and IV. (No explicit "met criteria" statement, but implied by successful evaluation). |
Implant Surface Area Simulation and Pull Out Test: Demonstrate acceptable BIC rate and pull out resistance. | Results demonstrated that the subject devices, despite having a slightly smaller surface area than the reference devices, presented a higher BIC rate and pull out resistance upon placement. Thus, the subject devices exhibit a level of benchtop performance equivalent to that reviewed for the reference device. |
MR Compatibility Testing: | |
Not configure a new worst case compared to reference devices, allow safe scanning under established parameters. | An assessment was made to demonstrate that the subject devices do not configure a new worst case and can be represented by the previously conducted studies reviewed for reference devices, since both have the same raw material and similar dimensions. The subject devices are therefore MR conditional devices and a patient treated with the subject devices can be safely scanned observing the parameters previously established per reference devices. |
Surface Treatment: | |
Identical or similar chemical processes to predicate/reference devices to achieve roughness. | The surface treatments applied to subject devices are identical to these applied and previously evaluated for primary predicate devices. Although some reference devices have a surface with different nomenclature, the chemical processes applied to the surface are similar to create the roughness surface. Acqua implants are submitted to an additional step in order to increase their hydrophilicity, as already cleared for primary predicate device. |
Sterilization Validation: | |
Implants (Gamma Irradiation): Minimum Sterility Assurance Level (SAL) of 1 x 10^-6. | A minimum Sterility Assurance Level (SAL) of 1 x 10^-6 has been validated based on ISO 11137-1 and ISO 11137-2. |
Abutments (Ethylene Oxide): Minimum Sterility Assurance Level (SAL) of 1 x 10^-6. | A minimum Sterility Assurance Level (SAL) of 1 x 10^-6 has been validated based on ISO 11135-1. |
Endotoxin Testing (LAL): | |
Meet pyrogen limit specifications (acceptance criteria for endotoxin levels). | Subject devices meet the acceptance criteria for endotoxin levels as well as the primary predicate and reference devices. |
Shelf Life Validation: | |
Packaging integrity maintained; established expiration date. | The shelf life for devices provided sterile is 5 years, except Helix Short Acqua Implants that have a shelf life of 4 years. The expiration date was determined considering product integrity and packaging tests. |
Biocompatibility: | |
No new issues compared to predicate/reference devices. | No new issues of biocompatibility are raised for the subject devices when compared to primary predicate and reference devices. Therefore, no additional biocompatibility testing was required. |
2. Sample Size Used for the Test Set and Data Provenance
The document does not explicitly state the numerical sample size for the test sets in the mechanical, MR compatibility, or other in-vitro studies. It refers to "tested subject devices" or "representative samples."
- Data Provenance: The studies described (mechanical testing, MR compatibility, surface treatment, sterilization, endotoxin, shelf life, biocompatibility) are all benchtop/laboratory studies (in vitro). There is no mention of human subject data, animal data, or clinical retrospective/prospective data for these specific performance criteria. The manufacturer is JJGC Indústria e Comércio de Materiais Dentários S.A. (dba Neodent) based in Curitiba, Paraná, Brazil.
3. Number of Experts Used to Establish the Ground Truth for the Test Set and Qualifications of Those Experts
Not applicable. As these are benchtop/laboratory performance studies, "ground truth" is established by adherence to recognized standards (e.g., ISO 14801, ISO 11137, ISO 11135, ISO 10993) and scientific methods, not by expert consensus in the typical sense for clinical data.
4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set
Not applicable. Adjudication methods like 2+1 or 3+1 are typically used for interpreting clinical images or patient outcomes, not for objective benchtop performance data against engineering standards.
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. This device is an endosseous dental implant system, which is a physical medical device, not an AI-powered diagnostic or assistive tool. Therefore, MRMC studies involving human readers and AI assistance are not relevant.
6. If a Standalone (i.e., algorithm only without human-in-the-loop performance) Was Done
Not applicable, as this is a physical medical device, not an algorithm.
7. The Type of Ground Truth Used
The "ground truth" for the performance claims is based on:
- Adherence to International Standards: Performance measured against specifications outlined in standards like ISO 14801 (dynamic fatigue), ISO 11137 and ISO 11135 (sterilization), ISO 10993 series (biocompatibility).
- Benchtop Test Results: Direct measurements and observations from the mechanical, physical, chemical, and biological laboratory tests performed on the device.
- Comparison to Predicate Devices: Performance is frequently established by demonstrating equivalence or superiority to already legally marketed predicate devices, which serve as a benchmark.
8. The Sample Size for the Training Set
Not applicable. This is a physical medical device. The concepts of "training set" and "validation set" are primarily used for machine learning and AI, not for the regulatory approval of physical implants based on benchtop testing.
9. How the Ground Truth for the Training Set Was Established
Not applicable for the same reasons as point 8.
Ask a specific question about this device
(265 days)
Straumann® dental implants and abutments are intended for oral implantation to provide a support structure for connected prosthetic devices.
Straumann® BLX Dental Implants, SLActive®
Straumann® dental implants are indicated for functional and esthetic oral rehabilitation of the upper or lower jaw of edentulous or partially edentulous patients. They can be used for immediate, early or late implantation following the extraction or loss of natural teeth. The implants can be placed with immediate function for single-tooth and/or multiple-tooth restorations when good primary stability is achieved and with appropriate occlusal loading to restore chewing function.
Straumann® TLX Dental Implants, SLActive®
Straumann® dental implants are indicated for the functional and esthetic oral rehabilitation of the upper or lower jaw of edentulous or partially edentulous patients. They can be used for immediate, early or late implantation following the extraction or loss of natural teeth. The implants can be placed with immediate function for single-tooth and/or multiple-tooth restorations when good primary stability is achieved and with appropriate occlusal loading to restore chewing function.
Other Straumann® Tissue Level and Bone Level Dental Implants, SLActive®
Straumann® dental implants are indicated for functional and esthetic oral rehabilitation of the upper or lower jaw of edentulous or partially edentulous patients. Unless stated in specific indications, they can be used for immediate, early or late implantation following the extraction or loss of natural teeth. The implants can be placed with immediate function for single-tooth and/or multiple-tooth restorations when good primary stability is achieved and with appropriate occlusal loading to restore chewing function.
Specific indications for use
Straumann® Roxolid® Bone Level Tapered Implant ø 2.9 mm
The Straumann® Roxolid® Bone Level Tapered implants ø 2.9 mm are indicated for single-unit reconstruction of incisors in the lower jaw and lateral incisors in the upper jaw.
Straumann® Roxolid® Standard Plus 4 mm Short Implants
Straumann® Roxolid® Standard Plus 4 mm Short Implants are indicated for fixed or removable reconstruction in situations of moderate to severely atrophic jawbone with adequate bone quality that allows primary stability after implant insertion, where a longer implant cannot be placed due to limited vertical bone height. The recommended healing time before loading is between 10 to 12 weeks.
Straumann® Roxolid® Standard Plus 4 mm Short Implants are specifically indicated for:
Fixed denture prosthesis/splinted units (one implant per unit).
Pontic cases in combination with at least one longer implant.
Fully edentulous cases with at least one Straumann® Roxolid® Standard Plus 4 mm Short Implants in combination with 2 longer implants in the anterior region and at least four total implants.
Titanium Ø 3.3 mm implants
ø3.3 mm S and SP RN implants are to be used only for the following indications:
Partially dentate jaws with implant-borne, fixed constructions: combine with a Ø4.1 mm implants and splint the superstructure.
The SLActive® Implants from the Straumann® Dental Implants System includes:
SLActive® and Roxolid®, Standard, Ø3.3 RN, 8, 10, 12, 14, and 16 mm
SLActive® and Roxolid®, Standard, Ø4.1 RN, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, and 16 mm
SLActive® and Roxolid®, Standard, Ø4.8 RN, 6, 8, 10, 12, and 14 mm
SLActive® and Roxolid®, Standard, Ø4.8 WN, 6, 8, 10, and 12 mm
SLActive® and Roxolid®, Standard Plus, Ø3.3 NNC, 8, 10, 12, and 14 mm
SLActive® and Roxolid®, Standard Plus, Ø3.3 RN, 8, 10, 12, and 14 mm
SLActive® and Roxolid®, Standard Plus, Ø4.1 RN and Ø4.8 RN, 6, 8, 10, 12, and 14 mm
SLActive® and Roxolid®, Standard Plus, Ø4.8 WN, 6, 8, 10 and 12 mm
SLActive® and Roxolid®, Bone Level, Ø3.3 NC, Ø4.1 RC, and Ø4.8 RC, 8, 10, 12, and 14 mm
SLActive® and Roxolid®, Bone Level Tapered, Ø2.9 SC 10, 12 and 14 mm
SLActive® and Roxolid®, Bone Level Tapered, Ø3.3 NC, Ø4.1 RC, and Ø4.8 RC, 8, 10, 12, 14. 16 and 18 mm
SLActive® and Roxolid®, BLX, Ø3.5 RB, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18 mm
SLActive® and Roxolid®, BLX, Ø3.75 RB, Ø4.0 RB, Ø4.5 RB and Ø5.0 RB, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16. 18 mm
SLActive® and Roxolid®, BLX, Ø5.5 WB and Ø6.5 WB, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14 and 16 mm
SLActive® and Roxolid®, Standard, TLX, Ø3.75 NT, Ø3.75 RT, Ø4.5 NT and Ø4.5 RT, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16 and 18 mm
SLActive® and Roxolid®, Standard, TLX, Ø5.5 WT and Ø6.5 WT, 6, 8, 10 and 12 mm
SLActive® and Roxolid®, Standard Plus, TLX, Ø3.75 RT, Ø4.5 NT and Ø4.5 RT, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16 and 18 mm
SLActive® and Roxolid®, Standard Plus, TLX, Ø5.5 WT and Ø6.5 WT, 6, 8, 10 and 12 mm
SLActive® and Roxolid®, Standard Plus Short, Ø4.1 RN and Ø4.8 RN and WN, 4 mm 4 mm Short Implants
The device being discussed is "Straumann® SLActive® labeling changes" (K223083). This 510(k) pertains to labeling changes for existing Straumann® SLActive® dental implants and does not introduce new implants or modify existing implant designs. The primary predicate device is K171784 – Straumann Dental Implant System, with several other Straumann® implant systems listed as reference devices.
The acceptance criteria and supporting study are primarily focused on substantiating the updated labeling, particularly regarding the use of SLActive implants in smokers and general wording clarifications.
1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance
Acceptance Criteria (Evaluation by FDA) | Reported Device Performance (Summary from Submission) |
---|---|
For General Labeling Changes (Changes to Indications for Use wording): | |
Demonstrated substantial equivalence to predicate devices, ensuring that differences in wording do not alter the application, safety, or effectiveness of the devices. | The provided comparative tables for Indications for Use (Table 2) show that the proposed wording is Equivalent to the primary and reference predicate devices. |
- All indications continue to allow for implant placement in the jaw, providing support for single-tooth or multiple-tooth restorations, and allowing for immediate loading when good primary stability is achieved.
- Information regarding prosthetic restorations was not excluded but relocated to the device description for better understanding.
- The requirement for "4 or more implants for fully edentulous patients" was removed from indications for use as it is considered "common knowledge."
- New specific Indications for Use for Ø 3.3 mm implants provide more details.
- The "Precaution" section of the Instructions for Use now addresses the use of narrow implants in the molar region.
- For specific implant types (e.g., BLX implants), the single-tooth restoration was considered the "worst case due to the higher masticatory load," indicating an understanding of potential stress. |
| For "Smokers' Claim" (Outcomes of SLActive implants in smokers are encouraging):
Supported by clinical evidence demonstrating that implant performance (e.g., failure rates, adverse events) is not significantly worse in smokers compared to non-smokers with SLActive implants.
Demonstrated through systematic literature review or clinical studies. | A systematic literature search identified 5 publications. - 251 SLActive implants were placed in 237 patients (age range 25-65 years old).
- Studies included titanium or titanium-zirconium alloy implants with SLActive surfaces, diameters 3.3-4.8 mm, and lengths 8-12 mm.
- Reported adverse events (failure to osseointegrate, peri-implantitis, spinning/mobility during surgery, late failure, bone loss, abutment loosening, paresthesia, acrylic/porcelain chipping) were not reported at a higher rate in smokers compared to non-smokers.
- Implant failure rates were not found to be significantly different in smoking compared to non-smoking patients with SLActive implants.
- References: Alsahhaf A (2019), Xiao W (2021), Chen Y (2017), Sener T (2010), Luongo G (2016). (Note: Sener and Luongo were cited in the text but not fully listed in the provided references section). |
| Sterility:
Sterilization process validated to SAL of 10^-6.
Meets pyrogen limit specifications. | - Sterilization via gamma irradiation after final packaging. - Validated to a Sterility Assurance Level (SAL) of 10^-6 in accordance with ISO 11137-1 and ISO 11137-2 (VDmax25 method).
- Pyrogen limit specifications met with LAL Endotoxin Analysis, testing limit of 20 EU/device (per FDA Guidance and ISO 10993-1). |
| Biocompatibility:
Biological assessment performed according to ISO 10993-1 and FDA Guidance. | - Biological assessment performed according to ISO 10993-1 and FDA Guidance "Use of International Standard ISO 10993-1..." for each device. (Results are not detailed but the assessment was stated to be performed). |
| Dynamic Fatigue:
Assessment conducted per FDA guidance and ISO 14801. | - Dynamic fatigue assessment conducted according to FDA guidance "Class II Special Controls Guidance Document: Rootform Endosseous Dental Implants and Endosseous Dental Abutments" and ISO 14801. - Test covers permanent restoration of implants without failure. (Results are not detailed but the assessment was stated to be performed). |
| Insertion Performance:
Demonstrated adequate insertion torque in different bone classes. | - Insertion tests performed for the subject implants. - Showed adequate insertion torque in different bone classes when inserted according to the surgical procedure. (Results are not detailed but the assessment was stated to be performed). |
| MR Safety:
Evaluated for MR Conditional status. | - Obtained MR Conditional status per K180540. - MR Conditional tests conducted according to FDA's Guidance "Testing and Labeling Medical Devices for Safety in Magnetic Resonance (MR) Environment." (Results are not detailed but the status was noted). |
2. Sample Size Used for the Test Set and Data Provenance
The core of the "study" for the labeling changes, especially concerning the "smokers' claim," was a systematic literature review, not a direct clinical trial conducted by the applicant for this 510(k).
- Sample Size for Smokers' Claim: The literature review included data from 5 publications which collectively involved 251 SLActive implants placed in 237 patients.
- Data Provenance: The data came from published clinical studies. The document does not specify the exact country of origin for all studies, but at least two cited papers involve authors from China (Xiao, Chen), one from Saudi Arabia (Alsahhaf), and the ITT World Symposium (Chen 2017) was held in Switzerland. The studies are explicitly described as "clinical studies," implying they were prospective or retrospective clinical investigations.
For other non-clinical performance characteristics (sterility, biocompatibility, dynamic fatigue, insertion tests, MR safety), these appear to be internal bench tests and assessments conducted by the manufacturer, or previously established for the cleared predicate/reference devices. No specific sample sizes for these tests are provided in this summary, but it's stated that "No significant changes have been performed to the subject implants since clearance so previously cleared bench data continue to be representative."
3. Number of Experts Used to Establish Ground Truth for the Test Set and Their Qualifications
- For the "smokers' claim" (literature review): The "ground truth" (i.e., the reported outcomes like adverse event rates and implant failure rates) was established by the authors of the original 5 clinical publications. The document does not specify the qualifications of these individual authors. However, given they are "published clinical studies," it's understood that dental/medical professionals (e.g., oral surgeons, periodontists, implantologists) would have conducted these studies and reported the outcomes.
- For the equivalence discussion of Indications for Use: The "ground truth" is established by comparing the proposed wording against the previously cleared wording in the primary and reference predicate devices, which were approved by the FDA based on clinical and scientific evidence at the time of their clearance. This comparison itself is performed by regulatory affairs experts on behalf of the manufacturer.
4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set
- For the "smokers' claim" (literature review): The adjudication of adverse events and implant failure rates was performed within each of the original 5 clinical studies. The specific adjudication methods used in those individual studies are not detailed in this 510(k) summary. Given the nature of scientific literature, these studies would typically involve clinical follow-up and assessment by the treating clinicians/researchers.
- For the Indications for Use equivalence: This is a comparison process, not a clinical adjudication. The equivalence of wording is assessed by regulatory experts against the historical FDA clearances.
5. If a Multi-Reader Multi-Case (MRMC) Comparative Effectiveness Study was done
- No, an MRMC comparative effectiveness study was NOT done. This submission is for labeling changes for dental implants, not an AI-assisted diagnostic tool.
6. If a Standalone (Algorithm Only Without Human-in-the-Loop Performance) was done
- Not applicable. This submission is for a medical device (dental implants), not a software algorithm or AI.
7. The Type of Ground Truth Used
- For the "smokers' claim": The ground truth was clinical outcomes data reported in peer-reviewed published clinical studies. These outcomes included adverse events (e.g., failure to osseointegrate, peri-implantitis, bone loss) and implant failure rates.
- For other performance tests (sterility, fatigue, etc.): The ground truth would be established through defined bench testing protocols and adherence to international standards (e.g., ISO, FDA guidance).
8. The Sample Size for the Training Set
- Not applicable. This submission is not for a machine learning or AI device that requires a training set. The "smokers' claim" was based on a literature review which leverages existing published clinical data, akin to an external validation set rather than a training set for the current submission.
9. How the Ground Truth for the Training Set was Established
- Not applicable. (See point 8.)
Ask a specific question about this device
(206 days)
TruAbutment DS is a patient-specific CAD/CAM abutment, directly connected to endosseous dental implants and is intended for use as an aid in prosthetic rehabilitation. It is compatible with the following systems:
• Straumann Tissue Level Implant (K122855, K202942): 4.1(RN), 4.8(RN), 6.5(WN) mm
All digitally designed abutments and/or coping for use with the TruAbutments are intended to be sent to a TruAbutment-validated milling center for manufacture.
TruBase is a titanium component that is directly connected to endosseous dental implants to patientspecific prosthetic restorations, such as copings or crowns. It is indicated for a screw-retained single tooth or cementretained single tooth and bridge restorations. It is compatible with the following systems:
- · Osstem TSIII SA (K121995) 3.5 (3.7) , 4.0 (4.2) , 4.5 (4.6) , 5.0 (5.1) , 6.0 (6.0) , 7.0 (6.8) mm (Mini, Regular)
- · Astra OsseoSpeed EV (K120414) 3.6, 4.2, 4.8, 5.4 mm
- · BioHorizon Tapered Internal(K093321, K143022, K071638) 3.0. 3.4, 3.8 mm
- · Straumann Tissue Level Implant (K122855, K202942): 4.1(RN), 4.8(RN), 6.5(WN) mm
All digitally designed zirconia superstructure for use with the TruBase are intended to be sent to a TruAbutment-validated milling center for manufacture.
TruAbutment DS system includes patient-specific abutments which are placed into the dental implant to provide support for the prosthetic restoration. The subject abutments are indicated for cemented or screw-retained restorations. The patient-specific abutment screw are made of Titanium grade Ti-6A1-4V ELI (meets ASTM Standard F-136). Each patient-specific abutment is supplied with two identical screws which are used for:
(1) For fixing into the endosseous implant
(2) For dental laboratory use during construction of related restoration.
The abutment is placed over the implant shoulder and mounted into the implant with the provided screw. The design and manufacturing of the patient-specific abutments take into consideration the shape of the final prosthesis based on the patient's intra-oral indications using CAD/CAM system during the manufacturing. All manufacturing processes of TruAbutment DS are conducted at the TruAbutment milling center and provided to the authorized end-user as a final patient-specific abutment.
TruBase consists of a two-piece abutment, where the titanium base is a pre-manufactured abutment that will be used to support a CAD/CAM designed superstructure (the second part of the two-piece abutment) that composes the final abutment. The system also includes a TruBase Screw for fixation to the implant body.
TruBase abutments are made of titanium alloy conforming to ASTM F136 Standard Specification for Wrought Titanium-6Aluminum-4Vanadium ELI (Extra Low Interstitial) Alloy for Surgical Implant Applications and are provided in a various prosthetic platform diameters (OSSTEM TSIII SA 3.5 (3.7), 4.0 (4.2), 4.5 (4.6), 5.0 (5.1), 6.0 (6.0), 7.0 (6.8) (Mini, Regular) and Astra EV 3.6, 4.2, 4.8, 5.4mm and BioHorizons Internal 3.0. 3.5. 4.5. 5.7mm and Straumann Tissue Level: 4.1(RN), 4.8(RN), 6.5(WN). The TruBase Screws are composed of titanium alloy per ASTM F136.
CAD/CAM customized superstructure that composes the final abutment intended to be sent to a TruAbutment-validated milling center to be designed and milled, according to the prosthetic planning and patient clinical situation. The superstructure is cemented to the TruBase in the lab. Use "RelyX Unicem 2Automix" as an adhesive extra orally to connect. TruBase is provided non-sterile therefore must be sterilized after the cementation of the customized superstructure on the TruBase.
The provided text describes a 510(k) premarket notification for two dental devices, TruAbutment DS and TruBase. The submission asserts substantial equivalence to a predicate device based on material, intended use, and mechanical testing. The document focuses on regulatory compliance and mechanical performance, rather than clinical efficacy measured by expert assessments or comparative effectiveness studies with human readers.
Here's an analysis of the provided information concerning acceptance criteria and supporting studies:
1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance
The acceptance criteria are primarily based on established international standards for dental implants and abutments and ensuring mechanical integrity. The reported performance indicates that the devices met these criteria.
Acceptance Criteria Category | Specific Criteria/Standard | Reported Device Performance |
---|---|---|
Mechanical Performance | Fatigue Test per ISO 14801:2016 | Met the criteria of the standard. Fatigue limit data for all implant lines demonstrated construct strengths suitable for intended use. |
Sterilization | End User Steam Sterilization Test per ISO 17665-1:2006, 17665-2:2009, and ANSI/AAMI ST79:2010 | Met the criteria of the standard (leveraged from predicate device). The performed validation method is the same as the predicate devices. |
Biocompatibility | Biocompatibility tests per ISO 10993-1:2009, ISO 10993-5:2009, and ISO 10993-10:2010 | Met the criteria of the standard (leveraged from predicate device). |
Material Composition | Ti-6A1-4V ELI (meets ASTM Standard F-136) for abutment and screws | Devices are made of Ti-6Al-4V ELI, conforming to ASTM F136. |
Dimensional Compatibility | Assessment of maximum and minimum dimensions of critical design aspects, tolerances, and cross-sectional images for implant-to-abutment connection. | Testing demonstrated implant to abutment compatibility and established substantial equivalency. |
MRI Safety | Worst-case MRI review using scientific rationale and published literature (e.g., Woods et al. 2019) addressing magnetically induced displacement force and torque based on FDA guidance "Testing and Labeling Medical Devices for Safety in the Magnetic Resonance (MR) Environment." | Rationale addressed parameters and supports safety in the MRI environment (no specific performance metric, but rather a successful review). |
2. Sample Size Used for the Test Set and Data Provenance
- Test Set Sample Size: The document does not explicitly state a sample size for the mechanical fatigue testing beyond "worst-case constructs." For other tests (sterilization, biocompatibility, MRI review), specific sample sizes are not provided, though these are typically laboratory-based tests rather than patient-data-based studies.
- Data Provenance: The document does not specify the country of origin for any data or whether the data is retrospective or prospective. The studies mentioned (e.g., fatigue testing, sterilization) are engineering and laboratory tests, not clinical studies involving patient data.
3. Number of Experts Used to Establish Ground Truth for the Test Set and Qualifications of Those Experts
This information is not applicable to the provided document. The studies described are non-clinical (mechanical, sterilization, biocompatibility, MRI safety) and rely on testing against established engineering and safety standards, rather than expert interpretation of a 'ground truth' in a clinical context.
4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set
This information is not applicable as the described studies are non-clinical laboratory tests and material/design assessments, not studies involving human judgment or adjudication.
5. If a Multi-Reader Multi-Case (MRMC) Comparative Effectiveness Study Was Done, and Effect Size of How Much Human Readers Improve with AI vs. Without AI Assistance
This information is not applicable. The submission relates to dental abutments, which are physical medical devices, and does not involve AI or image-based diagnostics requiring human reader performance studies.
6. If a Standalone (i.e., algorithm only without human-in-the-loop performance) Was Done
This information is not applicable. The device is not an algorithm or AI system.
7. The Type of Ground Truth Used (Expert Consensus, Pathology, Outcomes Data, etc.)
The "ground truth" for the non-clinical tests is based on:
- Established international and national standards (e.g., ISO 14801, ISO 17665, ISO 10993, ASTM F-136, ANSI/AAMI ST79).
- Engineering specifications and design limits (e.g., minimum thickness, maximum angle for abutments).
- Physical measurements and compatibility assessments (e.g., dimensional analysis and reverse engineering of implant-to-abutment connections).
- Scientific rationale and published literature for MRI safety.
8. The Sample Size for the Training Set
This information is not applicable. The devices are physical dental abutments, not AI models that require training data.
9. How the Ground Truth for the Training Set Was Established
This information is not applicable as there is no training set for an AI model.
In summary, the provided document focuses on demonstrating the substantial equivalence of physical medical devices through adherence to established engineering and safety standards, rather than clinical performance based on human reader assessments or AI model evaluations.
Ask a specific question about this device
Page 1 of 1