Search Results
Found 202 results
510(k) Data Aggregation
(27 days)
32615
Re: K253145
Trade/Device Name: Pre-Sutured Tendon
Regulation Number: 21 CFR 878.5000
Classification Name:** Suture, Nonabsorbable, Synthetic, Polyethylene
Regulation Number: 21 CFR 878.5000
The Pre-Sutured Tendon is intended for use as a construct in anterior cruciate ligament and posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.
The Pre-Sutured Tendon is for single patient use only.
The Pre-Sutured Tendon is a donated human nonbone tendon pre-sutured with sterile Ultra-high-molecular-weight polyethylene (UHMWPE) nonabsorbable sutures. The tendon is processed via the BioCleanse® Tissue Sterilization Process (The BioCleanse Process). The Pre-Sutured Tendon device is offered as a single strand and as a quadruple (quad) strand.
N/A
Ask a specific question about this device
(27 days)
97232
Re: K253024
Trade/Device Name: ProZip Knotless Implant
Regulation Number: 21 CFR 878.5000
Terephthalate) Surgical Suture
Device Classification
FDA Class: II
Product Classification: 878.5000
Materials | UHMWPE, Polyester | UHMWPE, Polyester | Same materials. |
| Regulation Number | 878.5000
| 878.5000 | Same regulation number. |
| Regulatory Class | II | II | Same regulatory class. |
|
The ProZip Knotless Implant is intended for use in soft-tissue approximation.
The ProZip Knotless Implant is comprised of braided ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene (UHMWPE) and Polyester sutures. It contains one working suture, also referred to as the repair strand, and shuttle strand that is used to shuttle the repair strand around the tissue. Additionally, the repair strand has a suture attached at either end to aid in passing through tissue, known as adaptor tail.
Sutures supplied meet United States Pharmacopeia (USP) requirements for non-absorbable suture except for diameter. Suture dyes are FDA approved. The device is sterilized by ethylene oxide gas and is provided sterile for single use. The device is intended for use in a hospital/clinic/surgical setting.
N/A
Ask a specific question about this device
(120 days)
Classification Name:**
CFR 878.3300: Mesh, Surgical, Collagen, Orthopaedics, Reinforcement of Tendon
CFR 878.5000
The Arthrex SpeedFLEX™ Implant is intended for use in general surgical procedures for reinforcement of soft tissue where weakness exists. The Arthrex SpeedFLEX™ Implant is also intended for reinforcement of soft tissues that are repaired by suture or suture anchors, during tendon repair surgery including but not limited to reinforcement of rotator cuff, patellar, Achilles, biceps, or quadriceps tendons. The Arthrex SpeedFLEX™ Implant is not intended to replace normal body structures or provide the full mechanical strength to support the rotator cuff, patellar, Achilles, biceps, or quadriceps tendons. Sutures used to repair the tear, and sutures or bone anchors used to attach the tissue to bone, provide mechanical strength for the tendon repair.
The Arthrex SpeedFLEX™ Implant consists of a decellularized human allograft dermis that is pre-sutured with FiberWire® suture (passing suture) and TigerLink™ SutureTape (implanted). The allograft implant will be offered in four (4) sizes. The Arthrex SpeedFLEX™ Implant is sold sterile, single use.
N/A
Ask a specific question about this device
(58 days)
38141
Re: K252225
Trade/Device Name: PowerKnot High Strength Sutures
Regulation Number: 21 CFR 878.5000
ethylene terephthalate) surgical suture |
| Primary Product Code | GAT |
| Regulation Number: | 21 CFR 878.5000
PowerKnot High Strength Suture is indicated for soft tissue approximation and/or ligation. These sutures may be incorporated, as components, into surgeries where constructs including those with allograft or autograft tissues are used for repair.
PowerKnot High Strength Sutures are non-absorbable braided suture constructs made of 100% UHMWPE. They consist of a multifilament core yarn with a braided sheath and they are available in various color options, with or without a stainless steel needle. The PowerKnot High Strength Sutures portfolio also includes a Running Direction Indicator (RDI) surface of the suture, aiding the surgeon when applying the suture.
N/A
Ask a specific question about this device
(144 days)
Orthopedics/Plastic Surgery
Regulation: 888.3040; Smooth or threaded metallic bone fixation fastener
878.5000
The Dunamis Screws are intended to be used as stand-alone bone screws indicated for use in bone reconstruction, osteotomy, arthrodesis, joint fusion, fracture repair, and fracture fixation of bone appropriate for the size of the device.
When used in conjunction with Dunamis Force DFX Suture or Suture Tape, the Dunamis Screw and Suture Locking System is intended to be used for fixation of bone-to-bone or soft tissue-to-bone. The components are intended to serve as fixation posts, a distribution bridge, or for distributing suture tension over areas of ligament or tendon repair.
Specifically, Dunamis will be offering these devices for use in orthopedic procedures, such as ACL/PCL repair and reconstruction for the adult and pediatric patient population when the device does not bridge, disrupt, or interfere with the growth plate; MCL, POL, LCL repair and reconstruction; IBT and PRT repair; and MPFL, ALL, Quadriceps Tendon, PLC repair and reconstruction. When used in conjunction with the Dunamis Screws, the Suture Locking System can be used as a cerclage to treat bone fractures, such as patella, greater tuberosity, or olecranon fractures.
The Dunamis Screw and Suture Locking System is to be used for fixation of bone-to-bone or soft tissue-to-bone, and is intended as fixation posts, a distribution bridge, or for distributing suture tension over areas of ligament or tendon repair. The devices are intended to be used in the adult or pediatric patient population, when the device does not bridge, disrupt, or interfere with the growth plate.
The Dunamis Screw and Suture Locking System consists of standalone bone screws, and various components which are compatible with previously cleared Dunamis Fixation Button System, Force DFX sutures and suture tapes, including: screws with suture locking features and suture wheel with various adapter options. The standalone screws are provided in various diameters, lengths, and configurations including headed and headless styles with various overall and threaded lengths. Screws with suture locking features are available in various diameters, lengths, and configurations. The suture wheel is available for standalone use with sutures or for use with compatible orthopedic plates with two adapter options (threaded or non-threaded post). The new components are manufactured from stainless steel and titanium alloy.
This document is an FDA 510(k) clearance letter for a medical device called the "Dunamis Screw and Suture Locking System." It focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence to existing predicate devices, rather than proving a specific novel clinical performance or effectiveness through a clinical trial with acceptance criteria for an AI or software-based medical device.
Therefore, the requested information about acceptance criteria, AI performance metrics, sample sizes for test/training sets, expert adjudication, MRMC studies, standalone performance, and ground truth establishment for AI/software would not be applicable to this type of traditional medical device clearance.
The clearance letter primarily discusses:
- Intended Use and Indications: For bone reconstruction, osteotomy, arthrodesis, joint fusion, fracture repair, and fracture fixation.
- Device Description: Consists of standalone bone screws and components compatible with previously cleared Dunamis systems, manufactured from stainless steel and titanium alloy.
- Predicate Devices: Several predicate devices are listed, including screws and suture systems.
- Performance Testing Summary: "Non-clinical performance data included ASTM F543 screw testing, static and dynamic construct testing, and engineering worst-case rationales." This indicates bench testing to demonstrate mechanical performance comparable to the predicates.
- Substantial Equivalence Conclusion: The device has the same intended use, similar technological characteristics, and similar materials to the predicate devices. Mechanical testing demonstrated substantially equivalent performance.
In summary, this 510(k) clearance is for a physical orthopedic implant system, not a software or AI-based medical device. The "acceptance criteria" here are met through demonstrating mechanical properties and performance that are substantially equivalent to already cleared devices, primarily via non-clinical bench testing.
Thus, a table of acceptance criteria for AI performance, details on test/training sets, expert adjudication, MRMC studies, or specific AI ground truth establishment methods are not present and not relevant to this 510(k) submission as described.
Ask a specific question about this device
(30 days)
Portland, Oregon 97232
Re: K252201
Trade/Device Name: HS Fiber®
Regulation Number: 21 CFR 878.5000
Terephthalate) Surgical Suture
Device Classification
FDA Class: II
Product Classification: 878.5000
The Riverpoint Medical HS Fiber® sutures are indicated for injury and/or reconstruction of soft tissue, excluding the ones listed in contraindications, where soft tissue ligation or approximation is required. The Riverpoint Medical HS Fiber® sutures are also indicated for conditions where allograft tissues are required to be fixated, such as ACL tears.
The Riverpoint Medical HS Fiber® sutures are non-absorbable, sterile, surgical sutures composed of multiple single strands of ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene (UHMWPE) braided together to form the implant. HS Fiber sutures are available in common sizes and lengths with or without pre-attached needles.
This FDA 510(k) clearance letter pertains to a surgical suture, the HS Fiber® Suture, and not an AI/ML powered device. Therefore, the request to describe acceptance criteria and a study proving device performance in the context of AI/ML (e.g., test set, ground truth, expert consensus, MRMC study, training set) cannot be fulfilled based on the provided document.
The document states: "The updates being proposed are limited to the labeling, no additional performance testing or biological evaluation was required." This indicates that no new performance studies (of any kind, let alone AI/ML specific ones) were conducted for this particular 510(k) submission (K252201). The device is deemed substantially equivalent to a previously cleared predicate device (K231163) based on the technological identity and minor labeling changes.
Therefore, I cannot provide the requested information for an AI/ML device from this document.
Ask a specific question about this device
(244 days)
HyperSuture™ White/Green Extension Line sutures are indicated for use in general soft tissue approximation and/or ligation, including use in cardiovascular surgery, and the use of allograft tissues for orthopedic procedures.
HyperSuture™ White/Green Extension Line cables are non-absorbable, sterile, surgical sutures composed of multiple multifilament strands of ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene (UHMWPE) braided together to form the implant. The sutures are intended to be used for general soft tissue approximation and/or ligation, including use in cardiovascular surgery, and allograft tissues for orthopedic procedures. HyperSuture™ White/Green Extension Line cables are available in USP #2-0. USP #2. and USP #5 and tapes are available in 0.8mm (USP 2-0 equivalent), 1.5mm (USP 2 equivalent) and 2.0mm (USP 5 equivalent). Both HyperSuture™ White/Green Extension Line cables and tapes are available in white/green, 36 inches or 40 inches in length, and with or without pre-attached AISI 302 stainless steel needles.
The provided text describes a 510(k) premarket notification for a medical device called "HyperSuture™ White/Green Extension Line." This document is a clearance letter from the FDA, indicating that the device is substantially equivalent to a previously cleared predicate device.
The information given is typical for a 510(k) submission for a physical medical device (suture) and does not contain the details typically found in a study proving an AI/software as a medical device (SaMD) meets acceptance criteria. Therefore, I am unable to construct the requested table and provide information on many of the points (sample size, expert ground truth, MRMC study, etc.) because the provided document is not about an AI/SaMD.
This document focuses on the physical and material properties of the suture (e.g., tensile strength, diameter, needle attachment, material composition, biocompatibility) and its substantial equivalence to a predicate suture. It does not mention any AI or algorithm component.
Therefore, I cannot fulfill the request as it pertains to an AI/SaMD and the provided text describes a traditional medical device.
If you have a document describing the study and acceptance criteria for an AI/Software as a Medical Device (SaMD), please provide that text for analysis.
Ask a specific question about this device
(118 days)
|
| Classification Name | 21 CFR 888.3010: Bone Fixation Cerclage21 CFR 878.5000
Arthrex FiberTape and Tiger Tape Cerclage sutures and Arthrex Radiopaque FiberTape Cerclage sutures are intended for use in soft tissue approximation and or ligation. These sutures may be incorporated, as components, into surgeries where constructs including those with allograft or autograft tissues are used for repair.
When used as bone fixation cerclage the sutures are intended for:
- · Trochanteric reattachment after trochanteric osteotomy following total hip arthroplasty)
- · Sternotomy indications including the "rewiring" of osteomized sternums
- · Trauma surgery indications including olecranon, ankle, patella and some shoulder fracture rewiring
- · Treatment of anterior glenoid bone loss using the Latarjet or bone block procedure (allograft or autograft)
- · Repair of long bone fractures due to trauma or reconstruction
- · Provide fixation during the healing process following syndesmotic trauma. such as fixation of acromioclavicular separation due to coracoclavicular ligament
- · Spinal applications including sublaminar and intrafacet wiring of the spinal column
The Arthrex Radiopaque FiberTape Cerclage sutures are non-absorbable braided sutures composed of Ultra High Molecular Weight Polyethylene (UHMWPE) which incorporates Bismuth Trioxide (Bi2O3), and Polyester yarns over a core of suture also made with Ultra High Molecular Weight Polyethylene (UHMWPE) with Bismuth Trioxide (Bi2O3), and Polyester. Dyes include D&C Blue No. 6. The UHMWPE is naturally yellow due to the addition of Bismuth Trioxide (Bi2O3). The sutures are assembled on an ABS loader. The sutures may also contain a FiberLink shuttling suture that is used for passing only.
The Arthrex FiberTape and TigerTape Cerclage Sutures are non-absorbable braided sutures composed of Ultra High Molecular Weight Polyethylene, polyester, and possibly nylon yarns over a core of FiberWire or TigerWire Suture (each made of UHMWPE and polyester). FiberTape differs from TigerTape in color and materials. FiberTape is blue/white suture consisting of UHMWPE and polyester. TigerTape suture is white/black consisting of UHMWPE, polyester, and nylon. Additional materials include cyanoacrylate at the suture ends which are cut off during the procedure. Dyes include D&C Blue No. 6 and Logwood Black. For the loop assembly the looped end of the suture is tied as a hitch over a sheath that secures a double loop or tied over the post of an ABS loader.
Here's an analysis of the provided text regarding the acceptance criteria and supporting study for the Arthrex FiberTape and TigerTape Cerclage Sutures and Arthrex Radiopaque FiberTape Cerclage Sutures:
Device: Arthrex FiberTape and TigerTape Cerclage Sutures; Arthrex Radiopaque FiberTape Cerclage Sutures
The provided document is a 510(k) Premarket Notification summary, indicating a submission to expand and align the indications for the Arthrex Radiopaque FiberTape Cerclage Sutures and Arthrex FiberTape & TigerTape Cerclage Sutures. The primary purpose of this submission is to demonstrate substantial equivalence to previously cleared predicate devices.
Based on the available text, the study presented focuses on demonstrating mechanical equivalence and biocompatibility, not clinical performance with human-in-the-loop for diagnostic accuracy. Therefore, several of the requested sections (e.g., MRMC studies, expert qualifications, adjudication methods, training set details) are not applicable or cannot be extracted from this document, as they pertain to AI/diagnostic device performance studies.
1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance
| Acceptance Criteria (What the device must achieve) | Reported Device Performance (How the device performed) |
|---|---|
| Mechanical Performance: Dynamic Tensile Fatigue Testing (5 million cycles in fluid) | "The submitted testing data, dynamic tensile fatigue testing in fluid for 5 million cycles, demonstrates that the Arthrex Radiopaque FiberTape Cerclage and Arthrex FiberTape & TigerTape Cerclage sutures are substantially equivalent to the primary predicate Kinamed SuperCable Iso-Elastic Cerclage System (K181749) and secondary predicate Arthrex FiberTape and TigerTape Cerclage sutures (K232755)." |
| Biocompatibility/Pyrogenicity: Meet pyrogen limit specifications | "Bacterial endotoxin per EP 2.6.14/USP <85> was conducted to demonstrate that the devices meet pyrogen limit specifications." |
| Equivalence to Predicates: Same intended use, materials, fundamental scientific technology, design, packaging, sterility, shelf-life, and MRI safety labeling. | "Compared to the secondary predicate Arthrex FiberTape and TigerTape Cerclage sutures (K232755), and reference device Arthrex Radiopaque FiberTape Cerclage sutures (K230976), the subject Arthrex Radiopaque FiberTape Cerclage and Arthrex FiberTape & TigerTape Cerclage sutures have the same intended use, materials, fundamental scientific technology, design, packaging, sterility, shelf-life, and MRI safety labeling." |
2. Sample Size Used for the Test Set and Data Provenance
The document describes mechanical testing and biocompatibility testing, not a clinical study on patient data.
- Mechanical Testing: The sample size for dynamic tensile fatigue testing is not explicitly stated in terms of the number of sutures tested, only the duration/cycles (5 million cycles). The provenance of the "test set" (i.e., the sutures themselves) would be from the manufacturer (Arthrex Inc.).
- Biocompatibility (Bacterial Endotoxin): The sample size for this testing is also not explicitly stated (e.g., how many units were tested), only the method.
3. Number of Experts Used to Establish the Ground Truth for the Test Set and Qualifications of Those Experts
Not applicable. This device is a surgical suture, not a diagnostic device requiring expert interpretation of results to establish ground truth from a test set. The validation relies on engineering and biological testing standards.
4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set
Not applicable. There is no "test set" in the context of diagnostic interpretation requiring adjudication.
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 a surgical suture, not an AI-assisted diagnostic tool.
6. If a Standalone (i.e. algorithm only without human-in-the-loop performance) was done
Not applicable. This device is a surgical suture, not an algorithm.
7. The Type of Ground Truth Used
- Mechanical Performance: The "ground truth" is defined by established engineering standards for suture performance (e.g., ability to withstand 5 million fatigue cycles) and substantial equivalence to predicate devices with a known safety and effectiveness profile. This is typically determined by physical measurements and adherence to pre-defined mechanical property specifications.
- Biocompatibility/Pyrogenicity: The ground truth is defined by established biological safety standards (e.g., EP 2.6.14/USP <85> pyrogen limits) to ensure the device does not cause adverse biological reactions.
8. The Sample Size for the Training Set
Not applicable. This device is a physical medical device, not an AI model requiring a training set.
9. How the Ground Truth for the Training Set was Established
Not applicable. As above, no AI model or training set is applicable here.
Ask a specific question about this device
(96 days)
|
| | Regulation Number: | 878.5000
The OsseoFit Interfacing Anchor and OsseoFit Bone Tunnel Construct are intended for use in soft tissue to bone fixation for the following indications: Shoulder Rotator Cuff Repair
The Riverpoint Medical Interfacing Anchor is comprised of a pre-deployed all-suture anchor with attached repair sutures and 302 stainless steel needles. The Interfacing Anchor is inserted into either the humerus or into passing slots available in devices intended for total shoulder arthroplasty. The Riverpoint Medical Bone Tunnel Construct is comprised of a double armed Ultra-High Molecular Weight Polyethylene (UHMWPE) suture with a preassembled polypropylene passing loop and 302 stainless steel needles. Suture supplied meet United States Pharmacopeia (USP) requirements for nonabsorbable suture except for diameter. Suture dyes are FDA authorized. The device is sterilized by ethylene oxide gas and is provided sterile for single use. Interfacing Anchor and Bone Tunnel Construct are available in common sizes and lengths with preattached 302 stainless steel needles and will be sold sterile for single use. The device is intended for use in a hospital/clinic/surgical setting.
The provided text is a 510(k) summary for the OsseoFit Interfacing Anchor and OsseoFit Bone Tunnel Construct. This document details the regulatory review process for a medical device and its substantial equivalence to a predicate device.
It does NOT describe an AI/ML-driven medical device, nor does it contain information about diagnostic performance metrics (e.g., sensitivity, specificity, AUC), test set characteristics, expert adjudication processes, or MRMC studies.
The "Performance Data" section of the document refers to non-clinical performance testing for a surgical device (an anchor and tunnel construct), not a diagnostic AI. The tests mentioned are:
- Usability engineering validation with simulated use in cadaveric models (EN62366:2015)
- Endotoxin/pyrogenicity testing (ANSI/AAMI ST72:2019, USP <161>, USP <151>, USP <85>)
- Mechanical testing to verify fixation strength (cyclic and pullout testing)
Therefore, I cannot provide the requested information regarding acceptance criteria and study details for an AI/ML device's performance, as the provided text pertains to a physical surgical device.
To directly answer your prompt based on the provided text, the following cannot be extracted:
- A table of acceptance criteria and reported device performance related to diagnostic accuracy (as it's not a diagnostic device). The acceptance criteria mentioned are for mechanical and usability performance of a surgical implant.
- Sample sizes used for a "test set" in the context of image analysis or diagnostic performance. The "test set" here refers to cadaveric models and mechanical testing samples.
- Data provenance (country of origin, retrospective/prospective) for a diagnostic dataset.
- Number of experts used to establish ground truth or their qualifications.
- Adjudication method for a test set.
- MRMC comparative effectiveness study, including effect size.
- Standalone (algorithm only) performance.
- Type of ground truth (expert consensus, pathology, outcomes data).
- Sample size for a training set.
- How ground truth for the training set was established.
However, based on the provided text, here's what can be inferred or directly stated about the "acceptance criteria" and "study" for this specific device (a surgical implant):
Acceptance Criteria and Device Performance (for a surgical implant):
| Acceptance Criterion (Type) | Reported Device Performance |
|---|---|
| Material/Suture Properties | Suture supplied meets USP requirements (except for diameter). |
| UHMWPE sutures tested per USP for needle attachment & tensile strength. | |
| Biocompatibility/Sterility | Endotoxin/pyrogenicity testing per various standards; results below recommended limits. |
| Mechanical Performance (Fixation Strength) | Performed comparably to the predicate device in cyclic and pullout testing. |
| Usability/Clinical Performance | Usability engineering validation with simulated use in cadaveric models performed as per EN62366:2015. Results support use and IFU. |
| General Performance (Overall Summary) | "In all instances of the testing referenced above, the acceptance criteria were met, and the proposed OsseoFit Interfacing Anchor and OsseoFit Bone Tunnel Construct performed as intended." |
| "Validations performed demonstrated that the OsseoFit Interfacing Anchor and OsseoFit Bone Tunnel Construct met all requirements for its intended use." |
Study Details (for this surgical implant):
-
Sample sizes used for the test set and data provenance:
- The "test set" refers to samples for mechanical testing and cadaveric models for usability. Specific numerical sample sizes are not provided in this summary.
- Data provenance is not described (e.g., where the cadavers came from, or if the mechanical tests were done by a specific lab).
- The studies were non-clinical ("bench testing" and "simulated use").
-
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):
- Not applicable in the context of diagnostic "ground truth." The "ground truth" for a surgical implant's mechanical performance is defined by engineering standards and comparative testing to predicates. Usability testing would involve typical users (surgeons, OR staff), but the number or qualifications are not specified.
-
Adjudication method (e.g. 2+1, 3+1, none) for the test set:
- Not applicable as this is not a diagnostic study requiring human expert consensus/adjudication of results. Performance is measured against physical test standards and engineering specifications.
-
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:
- No, a MRMC comparative effectiveness study was not done. This is a physical surgical device, not an AI/ML diagnostic tool.
-
If a standalone (i.e. algorithm only without human-in-the-loop performance) was done:
- Not applicable as this is a physical surgical device, not an algorithm.
-
The type of ground truth used (expert consensus, pathology, outcomes data, etc.):
- For mechanical testing: Engineering specifications and comparative performance to a legally marketed predicate device.
- For usability testing: Performance in simulated use conditions in cadaveric models against predefined usability objectives (derived from EN62366:2015).
-
The sample size for the training set:
- Not applicable. This is not an AI/ML device with a "training set."
-
How the ground truth for the training set was established:
- Not applicable.
Ask a specific question about this device
(86 days)
21108
Re: K241376
Trade/Device Name: HyperSuture All Blue Extension Line Regulation Number: 21 CFR 878.5000
-----------|----------------------------------------------------------|
| Product Classification: | 878.5000
HyperSuture All Blue Extension Line (both tape and cable) are indicated for use in general soft tissue approximation and/or ligation, including use in cardiovascular procedures, and the use of allograft tissue for orthopedic procedures.
HyperSuture All Blue Extension Line cables are non-absorbable, sterile, surgical sutures, composed of multiple multifilament strands of ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene (UHMWPE) braided together to form the implant. HyperSuture All Blue Extension Line cables are available in USP 2 and USP 5 and meet all surgical suture requirements established by the USP for class II non-absorbable surgical sutures.
HyperSuture All Blue Extension Line tapes are non-absorbable, sterile, surgical braids, composed of multiple multifilament strands of ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene (UHMWPE) braided together to form the implant. HyperSuture tape sizes do not conform to USP diameter requirements; however, HyperSuture tapes meet USP tensile strength and needle attachment strength requirements for equivalent USP size sutures. HyperSuture tape sizes are available in 1.5mm tape (USP 2 equivalent) and 2.0mm tape (USP 5 equivalent).
Both HyperSuture All Blue Extension Line cables and tapes are available in blue, 36 inches in length, and with or without pre-attached needles.
The provided text is a 510(k) summary for the HyperSuture All Blue Extension Line. This document is a regulatory submission to the FDA for a medical device and describes its equivalence to a predicate device. It does not contain information related to software performance, clinical studies, or AI algorithm validation. The device in question is a surgical suture, not a software or AI-powered diagnostic tool.
Therefore, I cannot extract the requested information (acceptance criteria, study details, sample sizes, expert qualifications, adjudication methods, MRMC studies, standalone performance, ground truth types, or training set details) because these are concepts applicable to software or AI device validation, which is not what this document addresses.
The document focuses on establishing substantial equivalence to a predicate device based on material, manufacturing, and physical performance characteristics, primarily adhering to USP (United States Pharmacopeia) standards for surgical sutures.
Ask a specific question about this device
Page 1 of 21