Search Filters

Search Results

Found 2 results

510(k) Data Aggregation

    K Number
    K050959
    Date Cleared
    2005-05-11

    (23 days)

    Product Code
    Regulation Number
    872.3765
    Panel
    Dental
    Reference & Predicate Devices
    Why did this record match?
    Reference Devices :

    K951296

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

    DELTON® Illuminating Pit and Fissure Sealant is indicated for preventive sealing of pits and DELT ON® Inummanding in and secondary dentition in combination with the acid-etch technique.

    Device Description

    The DELTON® Illuminating Pit & Fissure Sealant is a pit and fissure sealant containing releasable fluoride. The sealant contains a dye that is not visible in ordinary light but fluoresces a blue-white upon exposure to UVA light. Fluorescence provides contrast with natural dentition for margin inspection.

    AI/ML Overview

    I am sorry, but based on the provided text, there is no information about acceptance criteria or a study proving the device meets acceptance criteria for the DELTON® Illuminating Pit & Fissure Sealant. The document is a 510(k) summary and an FDA clearance letter, which describes the device, its intended use, and its substantial equivalence to a predicate device but does not contain detailed study results or acceptance criteria tables. Therefore, I cannot generate the requested table and information.

    Ask a Question

    Ask a specific question about this device

    K Number
    K983361
    Device Name
    PANAVIA F
    Date Cleared
    1998-11-13

    (50 days)

    Product Code
    Regulation Number
    872.3275
    Panel
    Dental
    Why did this record match?
    Reference Devices :

    K855211, K974486, K965091, K974089, K890494, K951296

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

    PANAVIA F is indicated for the following applications:
    Cementation of metal crowns and bridges, inlays and onlays.
    Cementation of porcelain crowns, inlays and onlays.
    Cementation of to composite resin crowns, inlays and onlays
    Cementation of adhesion bridges and splints
    Cementation of metal cores and prefabrication posts
    Bonded amalgam restorations

    Device Description

    PANAVIA F is classified into dental cement, CFR 21 Section 872.3275, because it is a device composed of materials such as dimethacrylate monomers and inorganic fillers intended to be used for cementation of dental devices such as crowns or bridges.
    PANAVIA F is a resin based cement cured chemically and by visible light activation, and the improved device of PANAVIA 21. There are two major improvements; the curing method and introduction of the metal adhesion primer (ALLOY PRIMER, K974089).
    This device consists of Paste (A and B pastes), ED Primer (Liquids A and B), ALLOY PRIMER, Oxyguard II, and accessories.

    AI/ML Overview

    This is a 510(k) premarket notification for a dental adhesive device, not an AI/ML device. Therefore, the requested information about acceptance criteria, study details, and AI/ML specific metrics is not available in the provided text.

    The document discusses the substantial equivalence of the "PANAVIA F" dental cement to predicate devices already on the market. The "acceptance criteria" in this context refer to the regulatory requirements for showing the new device is as safe and effective as existing ones, rather than performance metrics for an AI algorithm.

    Specifically:

    1. A table of acceptance criteria and the reported device performance: Not applicable in the context of an AI/ML device. The document states "These modifications do not affect the safety and effectiveness" of PANAVIA F compared to PANAVIA 21. The "performance" is implicitly tied to its intended use for cementation of dental devices.

    2. Sample size used for the test set and the data provenance: Not applicable. This refers to a medical device's components and intended use, not a test set for an algorithm.

    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. The "ground truth" here is the established safety and effectiveness of the predicate devices.

    8. The sample size for the training set: Not applicable.

    9. How the ground truth for the training set was established: Not applicable.

    The core argument for the device's acceptance is its "substantial equivalence" to legally marketed predicate devices, meaning it shares similar design, composition, function, and intended use, and that any modifications do not negatively impact its safety and effectiveness.

    Ask a Question

    Ask a specific question about this device

    Page 1 of 1