Search Filters

Search Results

Found 3 results

510(k) Data Aggregation

    K Number
    K243386
    Date Cleared
    2025-04-22

    (173 days)

    Product Code
    Regulation Number
    888.3080
    Reference & Predicate Devices
    Why did this record match?
    Reference Devices :

    K222561, K230894, K232282, K223413

    AI/MLSaMDIVD (In Vitro Diagnostic)TherapeuticDiagnosticis PCCP AuthorizedThirdpartyExpeditedreview
    Intended Use

    Ventris anterior cages are indicated for intervertebral body fusion of the spine in skeletally mature patients who have had at least six months of non-operative treatment. The device systems are designed for use with allogenic bone graft comprised of cancellous and/or corticocancellous bone graft and/or autograft to facilitate fusion. One device is used per intervertebral body space. Ventris anterior cages are intended for use at either one level or two contiguous levels in the lumbar spine, from L2 to S1, for the treatment of degenerative disc disease (DDD) with up to Grade I spondylolisthesis. DDD is defined as back pain of discogenic origin with degeneration of the disc confirmed by history and radiographic studies.

    Ventris 2-screw anterior cages may be used as a stand alone device only when two (2) vertebral body bone screws are used. Ventris 4-screw anterior cages may be used as a stand alone device only when at least two (2) vertebral body bone screws are inserted in the two medial fixation holes with one inferior and one superior screw trajectory. If the physician chooses to use Ventris anterior cages with fewer than two (2) screws in the two medial fixation holes with one inferior and one superior screw trajectory, then an additional supplemental spinal fixation system cleared for use in the lumbosacral spine must be used. Ventris anterior cages are intended for use at either one level or two contiguous levels in the lumbar spine, from L2 to S1, in patients having an ODI >40 and diagnosed with severe symptomatic adult spinal deformity (ASD) conditions. When used to treat ASD, or when cages with more than 20° of lordosis are used, Ventris anterior cages must be used with a supplemental spinal fixation system cleared for use in the lumbosacral spine and cannot be used as a stand alone.

    Ventris anterolateral cages are indicated for intervertebral body fusion of the spine in skeletally mature patients who have had at least six months of non-operative treatment. The device systems are designed for use with allogenic bone graft comprised of cancellous and/or corticocancellous bone graft and/or autograft to facilitate fusion. One device is used per intervertebral body space. Ventris anterolateral cages are intended for use at either one level or two contiguous levels in the lumbar spine, from L2 to S1, in patients having an ODI >40 and diagnosed with severe symptomatic adult spinal deformity (ASD) conditions. Ventris anterolateral cages are intended for use at either one level or two contiguous levels in the lumbar spine, from L2 to S1, for the treatment of degenerative disc disease (DDD) with up to Grade I spondylolisthesis. DDD is defined as back pain of discogenic origin with degeneration of the disc confirmed by history and radiographic studies. Ventris anterolateral cages are intended to be used with a supplemental spinal fixation system cleared for use in the lumbosacral spine.

    Ventris lateral cages are indicated for intervertebral body fusion of the spine in skeletally mature patients who have had at least six months of non-operative treatment. The device systems are designed for use with allogenic bone graft comprised of cancellous and/or corticocancellous bone graft and/or autograft to facilitate fusion. One device is used per intervertebral body space. Ventris lateral cages are intended for use at either one level or two contiguous levels in the lumbar spine, from L2 to S1, in patients having an ODI >40 and diagnosed with severe symptomatic adult spinal deformity (ASD) conditions. Ventris lateral cages are intended for use at either one level or two contiguous levels in the lumbar spine, from L2 to S1, for the treatment of degenerative disc disease (DDD) with up to Grade I spondylolisthesis. DDD is defined as back pain of discogenic origin with degeneration of the disc confirmed by history and radiographic studies. Ventris lateral cages are intended to be used with a supplemental spinal fixation system cleared for use in the lumbosacral spine.

    Device Description

    The Ventris system consists of intervertebral body fusion devices intended for lumbar interbody fusion using an anterior lumbar interbody fusion surgical approach (ALIF), anterolateral (i.e., oblique) lumbar interbody fusion surgical approach (AOLIF), or a lateral lumbar interbody fusion surgical approach (LLIF). The devices are intended to improve stability of the spine while supporting fusion. The Ventris constructs are intended for use at one or two contiguous levels in the lumbar spine (L2-S1). The components are offered in different shapes and sizes to meet the requirements of the individual patient's anatomy and are provided sterile.

    Ventris cages are available in six configurations: Ventris Ti Interbody anterior four-hole constructs for ALIF approach, Ventris Ti FRA Interbody anterior fully round ALIF (FRA) constructs for ALIF approach, Ventris Ti Open Interbody anterior two-hole constructs for ALIF approach, Ventris Ti AL Interbody anterolateral (i.e., oblique) constructs for OLIF approach, Ventris Ti Lateral FX two-screw lateral constructs for LLIF approach, and Ventris Ti Lateral Interbody lateral constructs for LLIF approach. All cages are also available with increased surface area options that provide additional endplate surface area. For the increased surface area cages, the outer footprint remains the same, but the volume of the internal graft window is reduced, creating more endplate surface area.

    Ventris cages are secured on the vertebral bodies using bone screws. A cover plate assembly prevents the screws from backing out after insertion. The cages and cover plates are made of titanium alloy (Ti-6Al-4V ELI) per ASTM F3001 Standard Specification for Additive Manufacturing Titanium-6 Aluminum-4 Vanadium ELI (Extra Low Interstitial) with Powder Bed Fusion. The bone screw and cover plate screws are made from titanium alloy (Ti-6Al-4V ELI) per ASTM F136 Standard Specification for Wrought Titanium-6Aluminum-4Vanadium ELI (Extra Low Interstitial) Alloy for Surgical Implant Applications. All anterior and anterolateral constructs are zero profile, reducing potential for vessel interference with the anterior column.

    All Ventris cages and cover plates are manufactured using the L-PBF (laser powder bed fusion) additive manufacturing method. L-PBF allows for the formation of solid, non-porous cages with a layered porous lattice structure on the surfaces of the components, including the surfaces of the interior graft window. This intricate structure facilitates bone in-growth by providing a larger surface of implant/bone contact than a buffed surface. Interbody cages and bone screws may also be titanium anodized to allow for identification of various heights/sizes by color.

    Ventris Ti Interbody cages, Ventris Ti FRA Interbody cages, Ventris Ti Open Interbody cages, Ventris Ti AL Interbody cages, Ventris Ti Lateral FX Interbody cages, Ventris Ti Lateral Interbody cages, and Ventris bone screws are also available with a Proximal HA Surface (hydroxyapatite) coating. Cages and bone screws are coated with 20mm HA layer composed of crystalline hydroxyapatite particles that mimic human bone tissue through shape, composition, and structure. This surface treatment increases implant anchoring by facilitating osseointegration and enhancing early bone growth. All Ventris devices are only available sterile packaged.

    Non-sterile, reusable surgical instruments to support implantation of the system are provided for use with Ventris devices are provided in steam sterilization trays.

    AI/ML Overview

    The provided FDA 510(k) clearance letter and summary for the Ventris IBFD focuses primarily on demonstrating substantial equivalence to predicate devices through non-clinical performance testing (mechanical, biocompatibility, sterilization, and packaging validation), rather than outlining specific clinical acceptance criteria for a diagnostic AI device or a direct human observational study.

    Therefore, the requested information regarding human reader studies, training data, and ground truth establishment, which are typical for AI/diagnostic device clearances, is not present in the provided document. The Ventris IBFD is a physical intervertebral body fusion device, not a diagnostic AI or imaging analysis tool.

    However, I can extract the acceptance criteria and performance related to the mechanical and physical properties of the device as described in the non-clinical testing.

    Here's the information based on the provided text, with the understanding that this is for a physical medical implant and not a diagnostic AI system:

    1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

    Acceptance Criteria CategorySpecific Test Standard / RequirementDevice Performance / Conclusion
    Mechanical StrengthStatic Compression (ASTM F2077)Met required mechanical strength criteria, demonstrated substantial equivalence to predicate devices.
    Static Compression Shear (ASTM F2077)Met required mechanical strength criteria, demonstrated substantial equivalence to predicate devices.
    Dynamic Compression (ASTM F2077)Met required mechanical strength criteria, demonstrated substantial equivalence to predicate devices.
    Dynamic Compression Shear (ASTM F2077)Met required mechanical strength criteria, demonstrated substantial equivalence to predicate devices.
    Subsidence ResistanceSubsidence Testing (ASTM F2267)Met required mechanical strength criteria, demonstrated substantial equivalence to predicate devices.
    Material PropertiesTensile Testing (ASTM F3001)Performance demonstrated substantial equivalence to predicate devices.
    Microstructure Assessment (ASTM F3001)Performance demonstrated substantial equivalence to predicate devices.
    Chemical Composition Assessment (ASTM F3001)Performance demonstrated substantial equivalence to predicate devices.
    Biocompatibility(Testing conducted)Successfully validated.
    Sterilization(Validation conducted)Successfully validated.
    Packaging(Validation conducted)Successfully validated.
    Risk Assessment(Worst-case analysis)No new or increased risks identified.

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

    • Sample Size: Not explicitly stated as a number of devices or test articles for each mechanical test. The text mentions "worst-case subject device" and "all process steps, including HIP and Non-HIP test articles" were taken into account. This implies a selection of devices representing various configurations and manufacturing processes were tested.
    • Data Provenance: The data comes from non-clinical laboratory testing performed by the manufacturer, Acuity Surgical Devices LLC, or a contract lab. The provenance is internal testing to establish product performance against industry standards. There is no mention of country of origin for test data, as it's not a clinical study. It's not retrospective or prospective in the clinical sense, but rather pre-market engineering validation.

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

    • Not applicable. For mechanical testing of a medical device, "ground truth" is established by adherence to recognized ASTM standards and validated testing methodologies. The "experts" would be the engineers and technicians conducting the tests and interpreting the results against the standard's specifications. The document does not specify their number or qualifications but implies standard engineering and regulatory expertise would be involved in such validation.

    4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set

    • Not applicable. Adjudication methods like 2+1 or 3+1 are used in clinical studies involving multiple human readers for diagnostic interpretation. For mechanical testing, the "adjudication" is inherently built into the pass/fail criteria of the ASTM standards and the rigorous interpretation of raw data against these predefined limits.

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

    • No. An MRMC study is not relevant for this type of device (an intervertebral body fusion device) which is a physical implant, not a diagnostic or AI-assisted system. No human readers or AI assistance are mentioned in the context of device performance improvement for an MRMC study.

    6. Standalone (Algorithm Only Without Human-in-the-Loop Performance) Study

    • Not applicable. This device is a physical implant. There is no "algorithm only" performance to evaluate. Its "performance" is its mechanical integrity and biological compatibility when implanted.

    7. Type of Ground Truth Used

    • The "ground truth" for the non-clinical tests is based on established industry standards (ASTM F2077, ASTM F2267, ASTM F3001) for the mechanical, material, and performance characteristics of intervertebral body fusion devices. These standards define the acceptable range of performance for such devices.

    8. Sample Size for the Training Set

    • Not applicable. This device is a physical implant, not an AI model. There is no concept of a "training set" in the context of its validation for FDA clearance. The design and manufacturing processes are developed based on engineering principles and existing knowledge, not through machine learning training data.

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

    • Not applicable. As there is no training set for an AI model, there is no ground truth, in that sense, to establish.
    Ask a Question

    Ask a specific question about this device

    K Number
    K232432
    Manufacturer
    Date Cleared
    2024-01-30

    (172 days)

    Product Code
    Regulation Number
    888.3080
    Reference & Predicate Devices
    Why did this record match?
    Reference Devices :

    K201614, K222561, K220782

    AI/MLSaMDIVD (In Vitro Diagnostic)TherapeuticDiagnosticis PCCP AuthorizedThirdpartyExpeditedreview
    Intended Use

    E3D™ -A Static Interbody Devices are thoraco-lumbar interbody fusion devices indicated at one or more levels of the thoracic spine (T1-T12), thoracolumbar junction (T12- L1), or lumbosacral spine (L1-S1) as an adjunct to fusion in patients with the following indications: degenerative disc disease (DDD), disc herniation (with myelopathy and/or radiculopathy), spondylolisthesis, deformity (degenerative scoliosis or kyphosis), spinal stenosis, and failed previous fusion (pseudarthrosis). DDD is defined as discogenic back pain with degeneration of the disc as confirmed by history and radiographic studies. These patients should be skeletally mature and have had at least six (6) months of non-operative treatment. Devices are to be filled with autograft bone and/or allogenic bone graft composed of cancellous and/or corticocancellous bone. These devices are intended to be used with supplemental fixation systems that have been cleared for use in the thoracolumbosacral spine (e.g., posterior pedicle screw and rod systems, anterior plate systems, and anterior screw and rod systems). Hyperlordotic interbody devices (≥20° lordosis) must be used with at least anterior supplemental fixation.

    E3D™ -A Integrated Interbody Devices are integrated lumbar interbody fusion devices intended for use in patients with degenerative disc disease (DDD) at one or two contiguous levels of the lumbosacral spine (L2-S1). DDD is defined as discogenic back pain with degeneration of the disc confirmed by history and radiographic studies. These patients should be skeletally mature and have had at least six (6) months of non-operative treatment. In addition, these patients may have up to Grade 1 spondylolisthesis or retrolisthesis at the involved level(s). Devices are to be filled with autograft bone and/or allogenic bone graft composed of cancellous and/or corticocancellous bone. These devices are intended to be used with three screws or anchors which accompany the implants. When used with screws, these devices are stand-alone interbody fusion devices. When used with anchors, these devices are intended for use with supplemental fixation (e.g., facet screws or posterior fixation). Hyperlordotic implants (≥20° lordosis) are intended for use with supplemental fixation (e.g., facet screws or posterior fixation). When used without screws or anchors, these devices are intended for use with supplemental fixation (e.g., facet screws or posterior fixation).

    When used for multilevel degenerative scoliosis or sagittal deformity, supplemental fixation that have been cleared for use in the thoracolumbosacral spine (e.g., posterior pedicle screw and rod systems, anterior plate systems, and anterior screw and rod systems) must be used.

    Device Description

    The E3D™ -A Interbody System provides interbody fusion devices designed to provide structural stability during spinal fusion. The E3D™-A Interbody System consists of interbodies offered in various sizes to accommodate surgical needs and anatomic requirements. The E3D-A Interbodies were designed to be placed via an anterior approach. All interbodies in the system are additively manufactured from titanium alloy powder, per ASTM F3001. The System offers both Static and Integrated Interbodies. The Integrated version is to be used in conjunction with three (3) screws that are subtractively manufactured from titanium alloy, per ASTM F136.

    The E3D-A Interbody System's implants are available with and without HA®®º Surface®, a 20-40 nanometer thin hydroxyapatite (HA) surface treatment. The surface treatment presents nano-scale topography on the entirety of the implant surface.

    AI/ML Overview

    The provided text describes a medical device, the E3D™-A Interbody System, and its clearance by the FDA based on substantial equivalence to predicate devices, rather than a study proving the device meets specific acceptance criteria through clinical performance or AI/software analysis.

    Therefore, the information required to answer the prompt (acceptance criteria for device performance, sample sizes, expert involvement, ground truth, etc.) is not present in the provided text. The document focuses on regulatory clearance for an interbody fusion device, primarily detailing its physical characteristics, indications for use, and comparison to existing similar devices.

    Specifically:

    • No acceptance criteria or device performance report is provided in the context of a study for clinical efficacy or AI performance. The "Performance Data" section solely refers to physical and material testing (ASTM F2077 for dynamic compression shear testing and Promimic's protocols for the HA surface treatment), not clinical outcomes or AI model performance.
    • No mention of a test set, training set, or data provenance for any AI/software component. The device is an interbody fusion system, a physical implant.
    • No information on experts, ground truth, or adjudication methods as these are not relevant to the type of regulatory submission described (510(k) for a physical implant based on substantial equivalence).
    • No Multi-Reader Multi-Case (MRMC) comparative effectiveness study is mentioned, as this device does not involve human readers interpreting images with or without AI assistance.
    • No standalone algorithm performance is mentioned, as there is no algorithm described.

    In summary, the provided document is a 510(k) clearance letter and summary for a physical medical device (an interbody fusion system), not a document detailing the performance evaluation of an AI or software device.

    Ask a Question

    Ask a specific question about this device

    K Number
    K230639
    Date Cleared
    2023-12-01

    (268 days)

    Product Code
    Regulation Number
    888.3080
    Reference & Predicate Devices
    Why did this record match?
    Reference Devices :

    K222561

    AI/MLSaMDIVD (In Vitro Diagnostic)TherapeuticDiagnosticis PCCP AuthorizedThirdpartyExpeditedreview
    Intended Use

    The Align Cervical Interbody Fusion is indicated for intervertebral body fusion of the spine in skeletally mature patients who have had at least six months of non-operative treatment. The device systems are designed for use with allogenic bone graft comprised of cancellous and/or corticocancellous bone graft and/or autograft to facilitate fusion. One device is used per intervertebral body space. The Align Cervical Interbody Fusion System is intended for use at either one level or two contiguous levels in the cervical spine, from C2 to T1, for the treatment of degenerative disc disease (DDD) with up to Grade I spondylolisthesis. DDD is defined as back pain of discogenic origin with degeneration of the disc confirmed by history and radiographic studies. The Align Cervical Interbody Fusion is intended to be used with supplemental spinal fixation system cleared for use in the cervical spine.

    Device Description

    The Align Cervical Interbody Fusion System consists of intervertebral body fusion devices that are implanted in the intervertebral body space via an anterior approach to improve stability of the spine while supporting fusion. Components are offered in different shapes and sizes to meet the requirements of the individual patient anatomy. Align cervical cages will be manufactured from titanium alloy per ASTM F3001 and will be offered with an optional hydroxyapatite (HA) coating. Implants will be provided sterile by gamma irradiation.

    AI/ML Overview

    The provided text is a 510(k) summary for the "Align Cervical Interbody Fusion System," a medical device, and not an AI/ML device. Therefore, the document does not contain the information requested in your prompt regarding acceptance criteria and studies proving the device meets those criteria for an AI/ML device.

    The document discusses:

    • Device Type: Intervertebral body fusion device
    • Regulatory Classification: Class II
    • Intended Use: Intervertebral body fusion of the cervical spine for degenerative disc disease.
    • Materials: Titanium alloy with optional hydroxyapatite (HA) coating.
    • Performance Testing: Confirmatory fatigue testing (dynamic compression shear, and dynamic torsion per ASTM F2077) – this is mechanical testing for an implant, not AI/ML performance.
    • Substantial Equivalence: Comparison to predicate devices based on indications for use, materials, and geometry.

    There is no mention of:

    • Acceptance criteria for an AI/ML algorithm.
    • Performance metrics like sensitivity, specificity, AUC, etc.
    • Sample sizes for test or training sets related to AI/ML data.
    • Experts establishing ground truth for AI/ML.
    • Adjudication methods.
    • Multi-reader multi-case (MRMC) comparative effectiveness studies for AI assistance.
    • Standalone algorithm performance.
    • Provenance of data (country, retrospective/prospective).
    • Ground truth methods (pathology, outcomes data).

    Therefore, I cannot populate the requested table or answer the questions related to AI/ML device acceptance criteria and study details based on the provided text.

    Ask a Question

    Ask a specific question about this device

    Page 1 of 1