Search Results

The Presto Breast Biopsy Device is intended for diagnostic sampling of breast tissue during breast biopsy procedures. It is to be used for diagnostic purposes only and is not intended for therapeutic uses.

The Presto Breast Biopsy Device is indicated to provide breast tissue samples for diagnostic sampling of breast abnormalities. It is designed to provide breast tissue for histologic examination with partial or complete removal of the imaged abnormality.

The extent of histologic abnormality cannot be reliably determined from its mammographic appearance. Therefore, the extent of removal of the imaged evidence of an abnormality does not predict the extent of removal of a histologic abnormality (e.g., malignancy). When the sampled abnormality is not histologically benign, it is essential that the tissue margins be examined for completeness of removal using standard surgical procedures.

The Presto Breast Biopsy Device is a sterile, single-use percutaneous biopsy device. The working end of the device includes a stainless steel coring cannula with a razor edge and a stationary coil located within the coring cannula. The handle of the device contains an actuation button, a sample collection chamber, a drive mechanism for rotating the coring cannula and a DC power jack for a 12V input. A reusable, medical grade AC/DC power supply provides 12V to the disposable device. Depressing the button on the handle rotates the coring cannula - allowing the operator to core and transport tissue samples to the collection chamber. The device may be used with a coaxial introducer.

The Presto Breast Biopsy Device, as per the provided information, is a medical device for diagnostic sampling of breast tissue. The submission focuses on its equivalence to predicate devices and its ability to meet established specifications through non-clinical studies.

Here's an analysis of the provided text in relation to the requested information:

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

2. Sample size used for the test set and the data provenance (e.g., country of origin of the data, retrospective or prospective)

The provided document describes non-clinical studies (in-vitro device performance, electrical & product safety, tensile strength & fatigue, biocompatibility, predicate device comparison, and simulated use testing). There is no information provided regarding a clinical test set involving human subjects. Therefore, details about sample size, country of origin, or retrospective/prospective nature of a clinical test set are not available in this document.

3. Number of experts used to establish the ground truth for the test set and the qualifications of those experts (e.g., radiologist with 10 years of experience)

Since the provided information focuses on non-clinical studies and does not describe a clinical test set with a ground truth established by experts, this information is not applicable / not provided in the document.

4. Adjudication method (e.g., 2+1, 3+1, none) for the test set

As there is no clinical test set described, an adjudication method for human readers is not applicable / not provided in this documentation.

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

The document describes a medical device (a breast biopsy device), not an AI assistance system for human readers. Therefore, an MRMC comparative effectiveness study regarding human readers and AI assistance is not applicable / not provided.

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

This device is a physical breast biopsy instrument, not an algorithm. Therefore, a standalone algorithm performance study is not applicable / not provided.

7. The type of ground truth used (expert consensus, pathology, outcomes data, etc.)

For the non-clinical studies performed, the "ground truth" would be engineering specifications, material properties, electrical safety standards, and functional requirements. For example:

• In-vitro device performance: Performance against pre-defined metrics (e.g., tissue sample size, cutting efficiency) in a controlled environment.
• Electrical & product safety: Compliance with IEC 60601-1 standards.
• Tensile strength & fatigue: Material science standards for strength and durability.
• Biocompatibility: ISO 10993 standards for biological safety.
• Predicate device comparison: Direct comparison of features, materials, and functionality with existing legally marketed devices.
• Simulated use testing: Performance against expected operational parameters in a simulated environment.

There is no mention of ground truth related to human clinical outcomes (e.g., pathology confirmed diagnoses) in this non-clinical submission.

8. The sample size for the training set

The document describes non-clinical testing for a physical device. It does not mention a "training set" in the context of machine learning or AI models. This concept is not applicable / not provided for this type of device submission.

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

Since there is no training set mentioned, this information is not applicable / not provided.

Ask a specific question about this device

The device is intended for use in obtaining biopsies from soft tissues such as liver, kidney, prostate, spleen, lymph nodes and various soft tissue tumors. It is not intended for use in bone.

The Bard® Biopty-Cut® Biopsy Needle and Bard® Biopty-Cut® Needle with Spacer are single-use biopsy needles. The Bard® Biopty-Cut® Biopsy Needle and Bard® Biopty-Cut® Needle with Spacer which are the subject of this Premarket Notification, have a modified sample notch. They are available in various gauges and lengths. The Bard® Biopty-Cut® Needle with Spacer is packaged with a computed topography spacer.

The provided document (K962077) describes a 510(k) premarket notification for a modified Bard Biopty-Cut Biopsy Needle. The core of the submission is to demonstrate that the quality of samples obtained with the modified needle (specifically, a change in the distal end of the sample notch from a radius to an angled configuration) is equivalent to that of the standard sample notch needles.

Here's an analysis based on your requested information:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

The acceptance criteria are implicitly based on demonstrating "no significant difference" in sample quality between the proposed device and the predicate device. The performance is reported as meeting this criteria.

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

The document does not explicitly state the sample size used for the test set in numerical terms (e.g., number of biopsies, number of needles tested). It refers to "Test results and report presented in Appendix B of this submission," which is not provided in the excerpt.

• Sample Size: Not explicitly stated in the provided text. It refers to "samples collected."
• Data Provenance: Not explicitly stated in the provided text (e.g., country of origin, retrospective/prospective). This would typically be detailed in an Appendix or study report.

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

This information is not provided in the excerpt. For a biopsy needle, "ground truth" related to sample quality would likely involve pathological evaluation by qualified pathologists; however, no details about experts or their qualifications are given.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set

This information is not provided in the excerpt.

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

This question is not applicable as the device is a biopsy needle, not an AI-assisted diagnostic tool for human readers. No MRMC study or AI component is mentioned.

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

This question is not applicable as the device is a biopsy needle and does not involve any algorithms or standalone performance as an AI system.

7. The Type of Ground Truth Used

The "ground truth" implicitly relates to the "quality of samples obtained." While not explicitly stated, for a biopsy needle, the most relevant ground truth for sample quality would typically be histopathological evaluation (pathology) to assess tissue integrity, cellular architecture, and diagnostic yield.

8. The Sample Size for the Training Set

This information is not applicable as the device is a physical biopsy needle, not an algorithm that requires a training set.

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

This information is not applicable for the same reasons as #8.

Ask a specific question about this device