The anatomical shoulder system, depending on the components used, is designed for: Simple humeral prosthesis: - Fracture dislocation or complex four part fracture of the proximal humerus - - Humeral head necrosis without injury to the glenoid cavity. - - Extensive humeral head cartilage damage without injury to the glenoid cavity - - Centered osteoarthritis with a glenoid cavity not allowing implantation of a glenoid implant. - Rheumatoid polyarthritis with thin rotator cuff. - - Off-centered osteoarthritis with irreparable cuff, and with maintained active elevation of at least 120°. Total anatomical prosthesis (cemented glenoid implant with 4 pegs) AND/OR - Centered glenohumeral osteoarthritis with functional rotator cuff - -Rheumatoid polyarthritis with functional rotator cuff - . Fracture sequela, functional rotator cuff with glenoid injury.
Device Story
Modular shoulder prosthesis; components include humeral stems, humeral heads (centered/off-centered), and cemented glenoids. Implanted by orthopedic surgeons in clinical/hospital settings using dedicated instrumentation. Replaces damaged shoulder joint surfaces to restore function and reduce pain. Clinical benefit derived from mechanical reconstruction of glenohumeral joint. No software or algorithm involved.
Clinical Evidence
Bench testing only. Performance evaluated per ASTM F1738-05, ASTM F1829-98, and ASTM F2028-05 for glenoid components. No clinical data provided.
Indicated for patients requiring shoulder arthroplasty due to proximal humeral fractures, humeral head necrosis, extensive cartilage damage, osteoarthritis (centered or off-centered), rheumatoid polyarthritis, or fracture sequelae. Contraindicated for patients without functional rotator cuff when using total anatomical prosthesis, or when glenoid cavity is unsuitable for implantation.
Regulatory Classification
Identification
A shoulder joint metal/polymer semi-constrained cemented prosthesis is a device intended to be implanted to replace a shoulder joint. The device limits translation and rotation in one or more planes via the geometry of its articulating surfaces. It has no linkage across-the-joint. This generic type of device includes prostheses that have a humeral resurfacing component made of alloys, such as cobalt-chromium-molybdenum, and a glenoid resurfacing component made of ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene, and is limited to those prostheses intended for use with bone cement (§ 888.3027).
Special Controls
*Classification.* Class II. The special controls for this device are:(1) FDA's:
(i) “Use of International Standard ISO 10993 ‘Biological Evaluation of Medical Devices—Part I: Evaluation and Testing,’ ”
(ii) “510(k) Sterility Review Guidance of 2/12/90 (K90-1),”
(iii) “Guidance Document for Testing Orthopedic Implants with Modified Metallic Surfaces Apposing Bone or Bone Cement,”
(iv) “Guidance Document for the Preparation of Premarket Notification (510(k)) Application for Orthopedic Devices,” and
(v) “Guidance Document for Testing Non-articulating, ‘Mechanically Locked’ Modular Implant Components,”
(2) International Organization for Standardization's (ISO):
(i) ISO 5832-3:1996 “Implants for Surgery—Metallic Materials—Part 3: Wrought Titanium 6-aluminum 4-vandium Alloy,”
(ii) ISO 5832-4:1996 “Implants for Surgery—Metallic Materials—Part 4: Cobalt-chromium-molybdenum casting alloy,”
(iii) ISO 5832-12:1996 “Implants for Surgery—Metallic Materials—Part 12: Wrought Cobalt-chromium-molybdenum alloy,”
(iv) ISO 5833:1992 “Implants for Surgery—Acrylic Resin Cements,”
(v) ISO 5834-2:1998 “Implants for Surgery—Ultra-high Molecular Weight Polyethylene—Part 2: Moulded Forms,”
(vi) ISO 6018:1987 “Orthopaedic Implants—General Requirements for Marking, Packaging, and Labeling,” and
(vii) ISO 9001:1994 “Quality Systems—Model for Quality Assurance in Design/Development, Production, Installation, and Servicing,” and
(3) American Society for Testing and Materials':
(i) F 75-92 “Specification for Cast Cobalt-28 Chromium-6 Molybdenum Alloy for Surgical Implant Material,”
(ii) F 648-98 “Specification for Ultra-High-Molecular-Weight Polyethylene Powder and Fabricated Form for Surgical Implants,”
(iii) F 799-96 “Specification for Cobalt-28 Chromium-6 Molybdenum Alloy Forgings for Surgical Implants,”
(iv) F 1044-95 “Test Method for Shear Testing of Porous Metal Coatings,”
(v) F 1108-97 “Specification for Titanium-6 Aluminum-4 Vanadium Alloy Castings for Surgical Implants,”
(vi) F 1147-95 “Test Method for Tension Testing of Porous Metal,”
(vii) F 1378-97 “Standard Specification for Shoulder Prosthesis,” and
(viii) F 1537-94 “Specification for Wrought Cobalt-28 Chromium-6 Molybdenum Alloy for Surgical Implants.”
{0}------------------------------------------------
Fournitures Hospitalières industrie
ARROW® anatomical shoulder system Traditional 510(k) Premarket Notification
# K093599
alletting the state the minister in the same in a man and in a
# NOV 2 4 2010
# 5. 510(k) Summary of Safety and Effectiveness
This summary of 510(k) safety and effectiveness information is being submitted in accordance to the requirements of SDMA 1990 and 21 CFR 807.92.
Date prepared: September 2nd 2010
The assigned 510(k) number is: K0903599
| 5-1. Applicant: | Fournitures Hospitalières industrie |
|-----------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| | 6 Rue Nobel, Z.I. de Kernévez<br>29000 QUIMPER - FRANCE<br>Tel: (+33) 2.98.55.68.95<br>Fax: (+33) 2.98.53.42.13 |
#### 5-2. Company Contact: Franck HUNT, General Manager Tel: (+33) 2.98.55.68.95
### 5-3. Product :
---
ン...
、
| Trade name: | ARROW® anatomical shoulder system | |
|-----------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--|
| Common name: | Shoulder prosthesis | |
| Classification: | The ARROW® anatomical shoulder system components are included in the following classifications:<br>- Shoulder joint metal/ polymer semi-constrained cemented prosthesis<br>Product code: KWS<br>Regulation: 21 CFR 888.3660<br>Class: II<br>- Shoulder joint metal/polymer non-constrained cemented prosthesis<br>Product code: KWT<br>Regulation: 21 CFR 888.3650<br>Class: II<br>- Shoulder joint humeral (hemi-shoulder) metallic uncemented prosthesis<br>Product code: HSD<br>Regulation: 21 CFR 888.3690<br>Class: II | |
### 5-4. Predicate/ Legally Marketed Devices :
Information on devices to which substantial equivalence is claimed:
| Manufacturer: | DePuy Orthopaedics, Inc |
|--------------------|-----------------------------|
| Device Trade Name: | GlobalTM Advantage Shoulder |
| 510 (K): | K984541/K992065 |
{1}------------------------------------------------
Fournitures Hospitalières industrie
Manufacturer: Device Trade Name: 210 (K):
Exactech, Inc. Exactech Equinoxe® Shoulder System K042021/ K061454
#### 5-5. Device Description:
The ARROW® anatomical shoulder system is a modular shoulder prosthesis, composed of the following elements:
- humeral stems,
- humeral heads (centred or off-centred),
- cemented glenoids.
The ARROW® anatomical shoulder system is intended to be implanted using the dedicated instrumentation supplied by the manufacturer.
#### 5-6. Indications for Use/ Intended Use:
As stated in the Indications for Use section and on the product related labeling (instructions for use and commercial documents):
#### > Simple humeral prosthesis:
- Four-part proximal humeral fracture, or dislocation fracture. .
- Humeral head necrosis without injury to the glenoid cavity. -
- Extensive humeral head cartilage damage without injury to the glenoid cavity -
- Centered osteoarthritis with a glenoid cavity not allowing implantation of a . glenoid implant.
- Rheumatoid polyarthritis with thin rotator cuff. -
- Off-centered osteoarthritis with irreparable cuff, and with maintained active elevation of at least 120°.
- > Total anatomical prosthesis (cemented glenoid implant with 4 pegs)
- Centered glenohumeral osteoarthritis with functional rotator cuff l
- Rheumatoid polyarthritis with functional rotator cuff -
- Fracture sequela, functional rotator cuff with glenoid injury. -
#### 5-7. Comparison of Technological Characteristics:
The ARROW® anatomical shoulder system and the selected predicate devices have the same intended use and substantial similar indications for use and share the following similarities:
- they are made out of the same materials (titanium alloy for the humeral stem, cobalt chromium alloy for the humeral head, polyethylene for the cemented glenoid),
- they are available in similar ranges of sizes, -
- they bear design features similarities.
#### 5-8. Performances:
The ARROW® anatomical shoulder system was tested according to ASTM F1738-05, ASTM F1829-98 and ASTM F2028-05 for the glenoid components.
{2}------------------------------------------------
After the testing was completed, it was determined that the ARROW® anatomical shoulder system performances were substantially equivalent to those of the selected predicate devices.
Risks to health have been addressed through the specified materials, processing controls, quality assurance and compliance to the Medical Device Good Manufacturing Practices Regulations.
#### 5-9. Substantial Equivalence:
The substantial equivalence of our products when compared to the selected predicate devices has been established following manufacturers' commercial documents, 510(k) submission's information available on FDA's website as well as conformance to standards in force.
The analysis of these technical data allows us to submit the ARROW® anatomical shoulder system as being substantially equivalent to the already cleared predicate devices selected to a draw a comparison.
All data on predicate devices which has been used to establish substantial equivatence is available in appendix 8.
#### 5-10. Conclusion:
Following the examination of all the above mentioned information, we believe that the ARROW® anatomical shoulder system is substantially equivalent to the selected predicate devices in terms of design, ranges of sizes, materials, intended use, performances, safety and effectiveness.
{3}------------------------------------------------
# DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES
Image /page/3/Picture/1 description: The image shows the logo for the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services. The logo features a stylized eagle with three stripes representing the department's mission. The text "DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES. USA" is arranged in a circular pattern around the eagle.
#### Public Health Service
Food and Drug Administration 10903 New Hampshire Avenue Document Control Room -WO66-G609 Silver Spring. MD 20993-0002
Fournitures Hospitalieres Industrie % Ms. Patricia Donnard Regulatory Affairs ZI de Kernevez 6 rue Nobel 29000 QUIMPER France
NOV 2 4 2010
Re: K093599
Trade/Device Name: ARROW® anatomical shoulder system Regulation Number: 21 CFR 888.3660 Regulation Name: Shoulder joint metal/polymer semi-constrained cemented prosthesis Regulatory Class: Class II Product Code: KWS, KWT, HSD Dated: October 25, 2010 Received: October 27, 2010
Dear Ms. Donnard:
We have reviewed your Section 510(k) premarket notification of intent to market the device referenced above and have determined the device is substantially equivalent (for the indications for use stated in the enclosure) to legally marketed predicate devices marketed in interstate commerce prior to May 28, 1976, the enactment date of the Medical Device Amendments, or to devices that have been reclassified in accordance with the provisions of the Federal Food. Drug. and Cosmetic Act (Act) that do not require approval of a premarket approval application (PMA). You may, therefore, market the device, subject to the general controls provisions of the Act. The general controls provisions of the Act include requirements for annual registration, listing of devices, good manufacturing practice, labeling, and prohibitions against misbranding and adulteration.
If your device is classified (see above) into either class II (Special Controls) or class III (PMA), it may be subject to additional controls. Existing major regulations affecting your device can be found in the Code of Federal Regulations, Title 21, Parts 800 to 898. In addition, FDA may publish further announcements concerning your device in the Federal Register.
Please be advised that FDA's issuance of a substantial equivalence determination does not mean that FDA has made a determination that your device complies with other requirements of the Act or any Federal statutes and regulations administered by other Federal agencies. You must comply with all the Act's requirements, including, but not limited to: registration and listing (21 CFR Part 807); labeling (21 CFR Part 801); medical device reporting (reporting of medical
{4}------------------------------------------------
Page 2 - Ms. Patricia Donnard
device-related adverse events) (21 CFR 803); good manufacturing practice requirements as set forth in the quality systems (QS) regulation (21 CFR Part 820); and if applicable, the electronic product radiation control provisions (Sections 531-542 of the Act); 21 CFR 1000-1050.
If you desire specific advice for your device on our labeling regulation (21 CFR Part 801), please go to http://www.fda.gov/AboutFDA/CentersOffices/CDRH/CDRHOffices/ucm115809.htm for the Center for Devices and Radiological Health's (CDRH's) Office of Compliance. Also, please note the regulation entitled, "Misbranding by reference to premarket notification" (21CFR Part 807.97). For questions regarding the reporting of adverse events under the MDR regulation (21 CFR Part 803), please go to
lttp://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/Safety/ReportaProblem/default.htm for the CDRH's Office of Surveillance and Biometrics/Division of Postmarket Surveillance.
You may obtain other general information on your responsibilities under the Act from the Division of Small Manufacturers, International and Consumer Assistance at its toll-free number (800) 638-2041 or (301) 796-7100 or at its Internet address http://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/Resourcesfor You/Industry/default.htm.
Sincerely yours,
Mark A. Milham
Mark N. Melkerson Director Division of Surgical, Orthopedic, and Restorative Devices Office of Device Evaluation Center for Devices and Radiological Health
Enclosure
{5}------------------------------------------------
## 4. Indications for Use
510(k) Number (if known): K093599
. NOV 2 4 2010
#### Device Name: ARROW® anatomical shoulder system This device is composed of the following elements: - humeral stems, - humeral heads (centred or off-centred), - cemented glenoids. ARROW® Indications for Use: The anatomical shoulder system, depending on the components used, is designed for:
#### Simple humeral prosthesis:
- Fracture dislocation or complex four part fracture of the proximal humerus -
- Humeral head necrosis without injury to the glenoid cavity. -
- Extensive humeral head cartilage damage without injury to the glenoid cavity -
- Centered osteoarthritis with a glenoid cavity not allowing implantation of a glenoid implant.
- Rheumatoid polyarthritis with thin rotator cuff. -
- Off-centered osteoarthritis with irreparable cuff, and with maintained active elevation of at least 120°.
#### Total anatomical prosthesis (cemented glenoid implant with 4 pegs)
AND/OR
- Centered glenohumeral osteoarthritis with functional rotator cuff -
- -Rheumatoid polyarthritis with functional rotator cuff
- . Fracture sequela, functional rotator cuff with glenoid injury.
Prescription Use: Yes (Part 21 CFR 801 Subpart D) Over the counter Use: No (21 CFR 801 Subpart C)
(PLEASE DO NOT WRITE BELOW THIS LINE-CONTINUE ON ANOTHER PAGE IF NEEDED)
Concurrence of CDRH, Office of Device Evaluation (ODE) Page of
Mark H. Milliken
(Division Sign-Oft) (Division Sign-Off)
Division of Surgical, Orthopedic,
Division of Surgices Division of Surg.
and Restorative Devices
K093594
510(k) Number .
Two short videos show you everything — or skip straight to the written tutorial if you'd rather read. You can reopen this any time from the Tutorial button in the top bar.
Part 1 — Search, results, and everyday workflows 16 min
Part 2 — Embeddings: the galaxy map 3 min
1. Search: exact and fuzzy
Type a phrase like "coronary artery calcification" into the search box. You get two kinds of results. Exact results match the literal phrase — prefix searches work ("coronary artery calcificati") but suffix searches do not. Fuzzy results match on the meaning and intent of your phrase rather than the exact words, and are sorted by relevance score. Hover over the Exact or Fuzzy badge on any row to see exactly why it matched.
Use the checkboxes above the results to narrow: SaMD keeps only software-only devices, AI / ML keeps only devices with AI.
Exact vs. fuzzy search: what's the difference?
Exact matches on the literal phrase (prefix search works, suffix does not). Fuzzy matches on the meaning and intent of the phrase rather than the exact words. Hover over the badge on any row to see why it matched.
You search "coronary artery calcification" and want only software devices with AI. What two filters do you apply?
Narrow by SaMD (software-only devices), then narrow by AI/ML (devices with AI).
2. The results table
Scroll right in the results table. The intended use is extracted for you — no need to open the PDF. The device story gives a high-level snapshot of what the device does and how it's used. The AI Performance sub-table shows each output name, acceptance criteria, observed values, and development/test dataset descriptions — the same format Innolitics uses for regulatory strategy outputs, and the fastest high-level fingerprint of an AI device. It is AI-generated but has been very reliable in practice.
Where do you find a device's intended use without opening the PDF?
Scroll right in the search results table. The intended use column is extracted for you; no need to dig into the 510(k) summary PDF.
What does the AI Performance sub-table show, and why is it useful?
Output name, acceptance criteria, observed values, development dataset description, and test dataset description. It's the same format we use for regulatory strategy output and Fast 510(k) input, and the fastest high-level fingerprint of an AI device. AI-generated but reliable in practice.
3. Judging fuzzy relevance
Fuzzy results trail off in relevance as you scroll. Use three signals to decide how far down to go: the fuzzy badge explanations, the intended use column, and whether your target output (e.g., Cobb angle) still appears in the AI Performance sub-table. Once it stops appearing, you're past the relevant zone. A top hit with a low score (~0.4) and a stretched explanation is a hint the closest predicates are far away — the project may be headed for De Novo. Note the fuzzy search is a pattern match: it doesn't handle negation ("not") well, and hardware devices can appear — filter by SaMD/AI ML to cut them.
How do you judge how far down fuzzy search results to go?
Use the relevancy signals: the fuzzy badge explanations, the intended use column, and whether the target output (e.g., Cobb angle) still appears in the AI Performance sub-table. Once it stops appearing, results are trailing off in relevancy.
4. Device detail page: chat and citations
Click a device name to open its detail page: device facts on the left, a chat window on the right. Ask something like "Describe the training data". The answer carries little citation bubbles — click one to jump to the highlighted passage in the source PDF, so you can verify every AI answer against the document. There's also a Download PDF button for sharing.
How do you verify an AI chat answer on the device detail page?
Click the citation bubbles to jump to the relevant highlight in the source document.
Reading rule for every project: how many summaries do you read in full?
At least the three most relevant 510(k) or De Novo summaries, in full. After that, use targeted chat questions to confirm your memory quickly. The tool supports this professional habit — it doesn't replace it.
5. Side-by-side comparison
Select multiple rows in the results table (aim for under ~10), then open the PDF Viewer tab. Ask one question — it goes to all selected devices in parallel, each with citations. This is the fastest way to compare and contrast devices: training data, PCCP scope, how they handled adding new scanners, and so on.
What does the side-by-side PDF viewer mode do?
Select multiple devices, open the PDF viewer tab, and ask one question (e.g., "Describe the training data"). It queries all selected devices simultaneously with citations, so you can compare and contrast quickly.
6. Collections
With rows selected, go to the Collections tab and create a labeled collection (e.g., "Cobb Angle Project"). Reload that selection any time — before a client call, pull up the collection and ask questions across all of its devices at once.
How do you save a set of selected devices for later use?
Select the rows, go to the Collections tab, and create a labeled collection (e.g., "Cobb Angle Project"). You can reload the selection anytime and carry it into the PDF viewer and other tabs that support selections.
7. Product codes and the regulations tree
Click a product code in the results to jump to it in the regulations tree — identification text, sibling product codes, and devices you can open in a PDF viewer on the right. Click a regulation number to see its identification, special controls, and related product codes. You can also search by product code or regulation number at the top of the tree. Always read the special controls if any exist for your device — it broadens your search and sharpens pre-kickoff research.
What can you do from the regulations tree view?
Browse product codes and regulation numbers, read the identification text and special controls, browse sibling product codes, open device PDFs on the right, and search by product code or regulation number at the top of the tree.
8. Chart view
Click Show Chart and segment by regulation number (or product code) to see which regulations dominate your result set. Clicking a regulation takes you into the regulations tree. Great for spotting that most matches are, say, hardware laparoscopic devices — a cue to go back and filter.
How do you see which regulations dominate a search result set?
Click "Show Chart" and segment by Regulation Number. Clicking a regulation takes you to the regulations tree.
9. The predicate graph
Open the Predicates tab for a family-tree view of predicate relationships. Click a node to trace its parents and children; selections from search carry over pre-selected. Commonly predicated devices are worth reading — a lot of people predicated them for a reason. The visual lineage is also handy on client calls, e.g. to show how a predicate family evolved and justify why your predicate still holds.
In the predicate graph, why are commonly predicated devices worth reading?
A lot of people predicated them for a reason. Clicking a node traces parents and children, and selections from search carry over pre-selected.
10. Embeddings: the galaxy map
The Embeddings tab plots every matching document in a 2-D "galaxy map" where semantically similar devices cluster together. Hover or click clusters to explore, and let AI label the clusters for you. Embeddings beat product codes for grouping: two devices can carry different product codes (LLZ vs. QIH) yet do the same thing — the embedding captures the meaning of the intended use and device story. This is also exactly how retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) works under the hood, and it makes a great visual on client calls.
Try it yourself
Head to the search page and work through a few of these AI/ML fuzzy searches to build intuition: perivascular fat on CT · aortic valve calcification opportunistic screening on noncontrast CT · breast cancer prediction on digital pathology slides · autism detection · gestational age prediction · a hearing aid that can also detect a pulse · foundation model based analysis of ECG · large language models · penetration test. Watch how the relevance scores, intended use, and AI Performance tables tell you when results stop being meaningful.