Search Results

Aequalis Shoulder System (excluding Acqualis Shoulder Fracture System): Prosthetic replacement with this device may be indicated to relieve severe pain or significant disability caused by: Degenerative pathologies : arthrosis, rheumatoid arthritis, post-traumatic arthrosis. Primary and secondary necrosis of the humeral head Displaced 4-part upper humeral fracture Humeral head fracture Other pathologies where arthrodesis or resectional arthroplasty of the humeral head are not acceptable Revision surgery when other treatments or devices have failed. Aequalis Shoulder Fracture System Traumatic or pathologic conditions of the shoulder resulting in fracture of the glenohumeral joint, including humeral head fracture and displaced 3-or 4-part proximal humeral fractures. Revision surgery when other treatments or devices have failed.

The labeling for the Aequalis Shoulder Fracture System and Aequalis Shoulder System is being modified to indicate that, when used as total shoulder prostheses, the Aequalis Shoulder Fracture System humeral stems, Aequalis Shoulder System humeral stems and Aequalis humeral heads are compatible with the Affiniti pegged glenoid components in addition to the Aequalis glenoid components that have been previously cleared for use with these systems. The Affiniti pegged glenoid components are available in sizes 40 - 56.

The provided text is a 510(k) summary for a medical device (Aequalis Shoulder System and Fracture System). This type of submission focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence to a predicate device, rather than proving performance against specific acceptance criteria through a clinical study or even a standalone technical performance study.

Therefore, the document does not contain the information requested about acceptance criteria, device performance, test set details (sample size, provenance, ground truth experts, adjudication), MRMC studies, or standalone algorithm performance.

The reason for this is that the submission states:

"The indications, intended uses, designs, materials and manufacturing methods for the Aequalis Shoulder Fracture System and Aequalis Shoulder System have not changed from those cleared previously in K060209. These systems, with labeling modified to include compatibility with the Affiniti pegged glenoid components, are therefore substantially equivalent to the systems that have been cleared previously."

This indicates that the submission is for a minor modification (compatibility with new glenoid components) to an already cleared device, relying on the substantial equivalence principle rather than new performance testing.

However, I can extract the following information based on the provided text:

• Device Name: Aequalis Shoulder Fracture System and Aequalis Shoulder System
• Device Type: Total shoulder prosthesis (Shoulder joint metal/polymer semi-constrained cemented prosthesis)
• Classification: Class II
• Product Codes: 87 KWS
• Predicate Devices: K994392, K003728, K012212, K032679, K060209 (for Fracture System) and K952928, K980244, K012212, K041339, K043077, K060209, K060988 (for Shoulder System).

In summary, there is no information in the provided document to answer the questions about acceptance criteria and device performance studies because the submission is based on substantial equivalence to predicate devices, not new performance data.

Ask a specific question about this device