K171934 · Smith & Nephew, Inc. · LPH · Nov 30, 2017 · Orthopedic
Device Facts
Record ID
K171934
Device Name
Birmingham Hip (BH) Dual Mobility Insert
Applicant
Smith & Nephew, Inc.
Product Code
LPH · Orthopedic
Decision Date
Nov 30, 2017
Decision
SESE
Submission Type
Traditional
Regulation
21 CFR 888.3358
Device Class
Class 2
Attributes
Therapeutic
Indications for Use
The BIRMINGHAM HIP Dual Mobility Insert is intended for use in BIRMINGHAM HIP Resurfacing (BHR) System revision surgeries in cases where an acetabular cup is retained and the femoral component revised.
Device Story
The BH Dual Mobility Insert is a cross-linked UHMWPE (XLPE) prosthetic component designed for hip revision surgery. It functions as an insert within a retained BHR acetabular cup, articulating with Smith & Nephew femoral heads and THA femoral stems. During low-level activity, articulation occurs between the femoral ball head and the insert (neutral position); during high-level activity requiring greater range of motion, the femoral stem contacts the insert, enabling articulation between the insert and the acetabular shell. Used in clinical settings by orthopedic surgeons, the device provides a revision option for patients with existing BHR systems, allowing for the retention of the acetabular cup while replacing the femoral component. It benefits patients by restoring hip function and stability during revision procedures.
Clinical Evidence
Bench testing only. No clinical data provided. Performance testing included dislocation analysis, range of motion, and wear testing, all of which met pre-determined acceptance criteria. Biocompatibility was evaluated per ISO 10993-1.
Technological Characteristics
Material: Cross-linked UHMWPE (XLPE) per ISO 5834-2:2011. Form factor: Insert component, 11 sizes (38-58mm). Articulation: Dual mobility (femoral head-to-insert and insert-to-shell). Sterilization: Identical to predicate. Connectivity: None (mechanical implant).
Indications for Use
Indicated for patients undergoing BIRMINGHAM HIP Resurfacing (BHR) System revision surgery where the acetabular cup is retained and the femoral component requires revision.
Regulatory Classification
Identification
A hip joint metal/polymer/metal semi-constrained porous-coated uncemented prosthesis is a device intended to be implanted to replace a hip 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 has a femoral component made of a cobalt-chromium-molybdenum (Co-Cr-Mo) alloy or a titanium-aluminum-vanadium (Ti-6Al-4V) alloy and an acetabular component composed of an ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene articulating bearing surface fixed in a metal shell made of Co-Cr-Mo or Ti-6Al-4V. The femoral stem and acetabular shell have a porous coating made of, in the case of Co-Cr-Mo substrates, beads of the same alloy, and in the case of Ti-6Al-4V substrates, fibers of commercially pure titanium or Ti-6Al-4V alloy. The porous coating has a volume porosity between 30 and 70 percent, an average pore size between 100 and 1,000 microns, interconnecting porosity, and a porous coating thickness between 500 and 1,500 microns. The generic type of device has a design to achieve biological fixation to bone without the use of bone cement.
{0}------------------------------------------------
Image /page/0/Picture/0 description: The image contains the logos of the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services and the U.S. Food & Drug Administration (FDA). The Department of Health & Human Services logo is on the left, featuring a stylized eagle. To the right of that is the FDA logo, which includes the letters "FDA" in a blue square, followed by the words "U.S. FOOD & DRUG" in blue, with "ADMINISTRATION" underneath.
Smith & Nephew, Inc. Mike Scott Senior Regulatory Affairs Specialist 7135 Goodlett Farms Parkway Cordova, Tennessee 38016
Re: K171934
Trade/Device Name: Birmingham Hip (BH) Dual Mobility Insert Regulation Number: 21 CFR 888.3358 Regulation Name: Hip Joint Metal/Polymer/Metal Semi-Constrained Porous-Coated Uncemented Prosthesis Regulatory Class: Class II Product Code: LPH, JDI, KWY Dated: October 26, 2017 Received: October 27, 2017
November 30, 2017
Dear Mike Scott:
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. Please note: CDRH does not evaluate information related to contract liability warranties. We remind you, however, that device labeling must be truthful and not misleading.
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 of medical device-related adverse events) (21 CFR 803); good manufacturing practice requirements as set forth in the quality systems (QS) regulation (21 CFR Part 820);
{1}------------------------------------------------
and if applicable, the electronic product radiation control provisions (Sections 531-542 of the Act); 21 CFR 1000-1050.
Also, please note the regulation entitled, "Misbranding by reference to premarket notification" (21 CFR Part 807.97). For questions regarding the reporting of adverse events under the MDR regulation (21 CFR Part 803), please go to http://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/Safety/ReportaProblem/default.htm for the CDRH's Office of Surveillance and Biometrics/Division of Postmarket Surveillance.
For comprehensive regulatory information about mediation-emitting products, including information about labeling regulations, please see Device Advice (https://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/DeviceRegulationandGuidance/) and CDRH Learn (http://www.fda.gov/Training/CDRHLearn). Additionally, you may contact the Division of Industry and Consumer Education (DICE) to ask a question about a specific regulatory topic. See the DICE website (http://www.fda.gov/DICE) for more information or contact DICE by email (DICE@fda.hhs.gov) or phone (1-800-638-2041 or 301-796-7100).
Sincerely,
# Mark N. Melkerson -S
Mark N. Melkerson Director Division of Orthopedic Devices Office of Device Evaluation Center for Devices and Radiological Health
Enclosure
{2}------------------------------------------------
# Indications for Use
510(k) Number (if known) K171934
Device Name BH Dual Mobility Inserts
Indications for Use (Describe)
The BIRMINGHAM HIP Dual Mobility Insert is intended for use in BIRMINGHAM HIP Resurfacing (BHR) System revision surgeries in cases where an acetabular cup is retained and the femoral component revised.
Type of Use (Select one or both, as applicable)
| <span style="font-family: sans-serif;"> <svg height="15" width="15"> <rect height="15" style="fill:lightgray;stroke:black;stroke-width:1" width="15"></rect> <path d="M2,2 L13,13 M13,2 L2,13" stroke="black" stroke-width="2"></path> </svg> </span> Prescription Use (Part 21 CFR 801 Subpart D) |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| <span style="font-family: sans-serif;"> <svg height="15" width="15"> <rect height="15" style="fill:white;stroke:black;stroke-width:1" width="15"></rect> </svg> </span> Over-The-Counter Use (21 CFR 801 Subpart C) |
### CONTINUE ON A SEPARATE PAGE IF NEEDED.
This section applies only to requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.
### *DO NOT SEND YOUR COMPLETED FORM TO THE PRA STAFF EMAIL ADDRESS BELOW.*
The burden time for this collection of information is estimated to average 79 hours per response, including the time to review instructions, search existing data sources, gather and maintain the data needed and complete and review the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this information collection, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to:
> Department of Health and Human Services Food and Drug Administration Office of Chief Information Officer Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) Staff PRAStaff@fda.hhs.gov
"An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB number."
{3}------------------------------------------------
# 510(k) Summary Smith & Nephew BH Dual Mobility Inserts
| SUBMITTER:<br>I. | Smith & Nephew, Inc.<br>Orthopaedic Division<br>7135 Goodlett Farms Parkway<br>Cordova, Tennessee 38016 |
|--------------------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| | Phone: (901) 396-1633<br>Fax: (901) 566-7159 |
| | Contact Person: Michael Scott<br>Date Prepared: October 26, 2017 |
| II.<br>DEVICE | |
| Name of Device:<br>Common Name:<br>Regulatory Class: | BH Dual Mobility Insert<br>Acetabular Component<br>2 |
| Classification Name,<br>Regulation Number,<br>Product Codes, | Hip joint metal/polymer/metal semi-constrained porous- coated<br>uncemented prosthesis (21 CFR 888.3358), LPH<br>Hip joint metal/polymer semi-constrained cemented prosthesis<br>(21 CFR 888.3350), JDI<br>Hip joint femoral (hemi-hip) metal/polymer cemented or<br>uncemented prosthesis (CFR 888.3390), KWY |
| III.<br>PREDICATE DEVICE | Primary Predicate - K110135 (S.E. 10/14/2011) POLARCUP Dual<br>Mobility System<br>Predicate 2 - K070278 (S.E. 04/16/2007) POLARCUP Dual<br>Mobility System |
The predicate devices have not been subject to a design related recall.
{4}------------------------------------------------
#### Device Description IV.
The BIRMINGHAM HIP Dual Mobility Insert prosthesis is a cross-linked UHMWPE (XLPE) insert intended for use in BIRMINGHAM HIP Resurfacing (BHR) System revision surgeries in cases where a BHR acetabular cup is retained and the femoral component revised. The BIRMINGHAM HIP Resurfacing (BHR) received initial PMA Approval under P040033 (05/09/2006).
The device consists of an XLPE insert component designed to articulate against the retained BHR acetabular cup. The insert is also designed to interface with Smith & Nephew femoral heads and THA femoral stems. During low level activity the articulation occurs between the femoral ball head and the insert with the insert remaining in a neutral position. During high level activities requiring a larger range of motion the femoral stem contacts the insert and articulation between the insert and shell will occur.
The inserts are supplied in 11 sizes between 38-58mm to match the core BHR acetabular cup size range.
The purpose of this 510(k) submission is to add a revision option for the BHR System in cases where an acetabular cup is retained and the femoral component revised.
#### INDICATIONS FOR USE V.
The BIRMINGHAM HIP Dual Mobility Insert is intended for use in BIRMINGHAM HIP Resurfacing (BHR) System revision surgeries in cases where an acetabular cup is retained and the femoral component revised.
{5}------------------------------------------------
### VI. COMPARISON OF TECHNOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS WITH THE PREDICATE DEVICE
The subject BH Dual Mobility Inserts have a similar intended use to the predicate POLARCUP Dual Mobility System implants (S.E. K110135 (S.E. 10/14/2011)). Additionally, the subject BH Dual Mobility Insert contains identical internal surface designs compared with the predicate POLARCUP XLPE Inserts as they relate to articulation against a femoral head. The subject BH Dual Mobility Insert size range is within the range of the existing POLARCUP insert sizes.
The subject BH Dual Mobility Insert is manufactured from identical XLPE material and follows an identical sterilization method as the predicate POLARCUP Dual Mobility System implants (S.E. K110135 (S.E. 10/14/2011)). Both the BH Dual Mobility Insert and the POLARCUP Dual Mobility System implants are available for use with metal, ceramic or Oxinium, 22 and 28mm femoral ball heads. Both the subject and predicate devices are manufactured, packaged and sterilized in the same locations and follow an identical manufacture process flow.
The Subject BH Dual Mobility Insert differences from the predicate POLARCUP Dual Mobility System implants consist of: The BH Dual Mobility Insert is intended for use against a fixed CoCrMo BH Acetabular cup whilst the POLARCUP Dual Mobility Insert is intended to articulate against the stainless steel POLARCUP Acetabular shell. Additionally, the BH Dual Mobility Insert is intended for use in a revision scenario for use against an insitu BHR Acetabular Cup whereas the POLARCUP Dual Mobility Insert is intended for use in both primary and revision cases against a new POLARCUP shell.
Bacterial endotoxin testing was completed and met the acceptable endotoxin limits as stated in the FDA Guidance , "Submission and Review of Sterility Information in Premarket Notification (510(k)) Submissions for Devices Labeled as Sterile," "Pyrogen and Endotoxins Testing: Questions and Answers," and ANSI/AAMI ST72.
{6}------------------------------------------------
Therefore, the technological characteristics of the subject device are the similar to the technological characteristics of the predicate device POLARCUP Dual Mobility System implants (S.E. K110135 (S.E. 10/14/2011)).
#### VII. PERFORMANCE DATA
The following performance data are provided in support of the substantial equivalence determination.
# Biocompatibility
The biocompatibility evaluation for the BH Dual Mobility Insert was conducted in accordance with FDA's Draft Guidance for Industry and FDA Staff "Use of International Standard ISO-10993, Biological Evaluation of Medical Devices Part 1: Evaluation and Testing Within a Risk Management Process".
The subject BH Dual Mobility Inserts are permanent implants and will be classified as permanent, >30 day body contact according to ISO-10993, "Biological Evaluation of Medical Devices Part 1: Evaluation and Testing within a Risk Management Process".
The subject BH Dual Mobility Inserts are manufactured from identical polyethylene XLPE materials as the predicate devices, in accordance with the following ASTM standard: ISO 5834-2: 2011. Biocompatibility testing and rationales have been provided for the subject BH Dual Mobility Inserts.
## Mechanical testing
To further support a determination of substantial equivalence, non-clinical bench (mechanical) testing was conducted on the proposed BH Dual Mobility Insert. Test results demonstrated that the proposed devices are substantially equivalent to the predicate POLARCUP Dual Mobility System.
Mechanical tests/assessments completed were:
{7}------------------------------------------------
- Dislocation Analysis .
- Range of Motion ●
- Wear Testing .
The subject devices with pre-determined acceptance criteria met the acceptance criteria for all tests.
#### VIII. CONCLUSIONS
Based on the test results and additional verification evidence activities provided in the premarket notification, the subject BH Dual Mobility Inserts are substantially equivalent to the legally marketed predicate devices: Primary predicate: K110135 (S.E. 10/14/2011) and Predicate 2: Predicate 2 - K070278 (S.E. 04/16/2007).
Predicate graph will load when search results are available.
Embedding visualization will load when search results are available.
PDF viewer will load when search results are available.
Loading panels...
Select an item from Submissions
Click any panel, subpart, regulation, product code, or device to see details here.
Section Matches
Results will appear here.
Product Code Matches
Results will appear here.
Special Control Matches
Results will appear here.
Loading collections...
Loading
My Alerts
You will receive email notifications based on the filters and frequency you set for each alert.
Sort by:
Create Alert
Search Filters
Agent Token
Create a read-only bearer token for Claude, ChatGPT, or other agents that can call HTTP APIs.
Copy this now. It will not be shown again.
Connected apps
Apps you authorized through browser sign-in. Disconnecting revokes their access immediately.
Learn the FDA Browser
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.