K180493 · Beijing AK Medical Co., Ltd. · JWH · Jun 22, 2018 · Orthopedic
Device Facts
Record ID
K180493
Device Name
A3 Total Knee System
Applicant
Beijing AK Medical Co., Ltd.
Product Code
JWH · Orthopedic
Decision Date
Jun 22, 2018
Decision
SESE
Submission Type
Traditional
Regulation
21 CFR 888.3560
Device Class
Class 2
Attributes
Therapeutic
Indications for Use
The A3 Total Knee System indications for use is: - . Painful, disabling joint disease of the knee resulting from: non-inflammatory degenerative joint disease (including osteoarthritis, traumatic arthritis, or avascular necrosis) or rheumatoid arthritis. - Correction of functional deformities. - Post-traumatic loss of knee joint configuration and function. - Moderate valgus, varus, or flexion deformity. - . Knee fractures untreatable by other methods. The A3 Total Knee System is indicated for cemented use only.
Device Story
A3 Total Knee System is a posterior-stabilized total knee replacement prosthesis; intended for cemented implantation. System comprises five components: femoral condyle, tibial tray, tibial insert, patellar component, and locking mechanism. Femoral condyle and tibial tray are cast cobalt-chromium-molybdenum (Co-Cr-Mo) alloy; tibial insert and patellar component are ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene (UHMWPE); locking clip is titanium. Device provides mechanical replacement of knee joint surfaces to restore function and alleviate pain in patients with degenerative or traumatic joint disease. Implanted by orthopedic surgeons in clinical settings. Output is physical joint reconstruction; clinical decision-making relies on surgeon assessment of patient anatomy and deformity. Benefits include restoration of joint configuration and improved mobility.
Clinical Evidence
Bench testing only. No clinical data provided. Performance testing included tibial tray fatigue, wear mechanical performance, constraint testing, contact pressure testing, shear fatigue testing (tibial post and patellar component), surface roughness analysis, physiological loads testing on interlocking mechanisms, and patella constraint/contact/static shear testing.
Indicated for patients with painful, disabling knee joint disease (non-inflammatory degenerative joint disease, osteoarthritis, traumatic arthritis, avascular necrosis, or rheumatoid arthritis), functional deformities, post-traumatic loss of joint configuration/function, moderate valgus/varus/flexion deformity, or knee fractures untreatable by other methods. Indicated for cemented use only.
Regulatory Classification
Identification
A knee joint patellofemorotibial polymer/metal/polymer semi-constrained cemented prosthesis is a device intended to be implanted to replace a knee 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 femoral component made of alloys, such as cobalt-chromium-molybdenum, and a tibial component or components and a retropatellar resurfacing component made of ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene. This generic type of device is limited to those prostheses intended for use with bone cement (§ 888.3027).
Stryker Triatholon Posteriorly Stabilized (PS) Total Knee System (K031729)
Submission Summary (Full Text)
{0}------------------------------------------------
Beijing AK Medical Co., Ltd. % Barry Sands President ROMIS, Inc. 110 Haverhill Road, Suite 526 Amesbury, Massachusetts 01913 June 22, 2018
Re: K180493
Trade/Device Name: A3 Total Knee System Regulation Number: 21 CFR 888.3560 Regulation Name: Knee Joint Patellofemorotibial Polymer Semi-Constrained Cemented Prosthesis Regulatory Class: Class II Product Code: JWH Dated: May 15, 2018 Received: May 21, 2018
Dear Barry Sands:
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
{1}------------------------------------------------
manufacturing practice requirements as set forth in the quality systems (OS) regulation (21 CFR Part 820); 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 comprehensive regulatory information about medical devices and radiation-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}------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERV CES Food and Drug Administration
#### Indications for Use
Form Approved OMB No 0910-0120 Expiration Date 06/30/2020 See PRA Statement below
510(k) Number (if known)
Device Name
# A3 Total Knee System
ndications for Use (Describe)
The A3 Total Knee System indications for use is:
- Painful, disabling joint disease of the knee resulting from: non-inflammatory degenerative joint disease (including osteoarthritis, traumatic arthritis, or avascular necrosis) or rheumatoid arthritis.
- Correction of functional deformities.
- Post-traumatic loss of knee joint configuration and function.
- Moderate valgus, varus, or flexion deformity.
- . Knee fractures untreatable by other methods.
The A3 Total Knee System is indicated for cemented use only.
| Type of Use (Select one or both as applicable) | | |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------|
| <table style="border:none"><tr><td><span style="font-size:120%">☑</span> Prescription Use (Part 21 CFR 801 Subpart D) </td><td> ☐ Over-The-Counter Use (21 CFR 801 Subpart C) </td></tr></table> | <span style="font-size:120%">☑</span> Prescription Use (Part 21 CFR 801 Subpart D) | ☐ Over-The-Counter Use (21 CFR 801 Subpart C) |
| <span style="font-size:120%">☑</span> Prescription Use (Part 21 CFR 801 Subpart D) | ☐ 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 EMA L 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 nformation 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 "
FORM FDA 3881 (7/17)
PSC Publishing Services (301) 443-6740 EF
{3}------------------------------------------------
#### 510(k) SUMMARY
#### Beijing AK Medical Co., Ltd.'s A3 Total Knee System
| Submitter | Beijing AK Medical Co., Ltd.<br>Aiguo Liu, FDA Project Team Leader<br>No. 10 Baifuquan Road<br>102200, Beijing, China |
|--------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Contact Person: | Barry Sands<br>RQMIS, Inc.<br>110 Haverhill Road, Suite 526<br>Amesbury, MA 01913<br>Phone: 978-358-7307 |
| Date Prepared: | February 16, 2018 |
| Name of Device | A3 Total Knee System |
| Name/Address of Sponsor: | Beijing AK Medical Co., Ltd.<br>Aiguo Liu, FDA Project Team Leader<br>No. 10 Baifuquan Road<br>102200, Beijing, China |
#### Common or Usual Name
Posteriorly Stabilized Total Knee Replacement
#### Classification Name
Per 21 CFR as follows: §888.3560 Knee joint patellofemorotibial polymer semi-constrained cemented prosthesis
Product Code JWH Regulatory Class II
### Predicate Devices
Primary - K113550, Biomet Vanguard Complete Knee System Additional – K031729, Stryker Triatholon Posteriorly Stabilized (PS) Total Knee System
{4}------------------------------------------------
# Intended Use / Indications for Use
### Intended Use:
The A3 Total Knee System device is a total knee replacement product line. The intended use is the same as the primary predicate device.
# Indications for Use:
The A3 Total Knee System indications for use is:
- . Painful, disabling joint disease of the knee resulting from: non-inflammatory degenerative joint disease (including osteoarthritis, traumatic arthritis, or avascular necrosis) or rheumatoid arthritis.
- Correction of functional deformities.
- Post-traumatic loss of knee joint configuration and function.
- Moderate valgus, varus, or flexion deformity.
- . Knee fractures untreatable by other methods. The A3 Total Knee System is indicated for cemented use only.
### Technological Characteristics
The technological features implemented in the A3 Total Knee System device are similar to the predicates and no new safety or effectiveness issues are raised. The subject device has the same material technology and is similar in design, function, and application to the predicate devices.
The subject device and both predicate devices are total knee replacement systems consisting of five components:
- 1. Femoral Condyle
- 2. Tibial Tray
- 3.
ന് Tibial Insert
- 4. Patellar Component
- ട. Locking Mechanism
The subject device and both predicates have femoral condyle and tibial tray components manufactured from cast cobalt chromium molybdenum (Co-Cr-Mo) alloy. The femoral components of all devices are available in both left and right configurations.
The tibial inserts of the subject device and primary predicate device are manufactured from conventional ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene (UHMWPE), while the reference predicate is manufactured using a combination of UHMWPE and cobalt-chromium (Co-Cr). The range of available sizes of the tibial trays and inserts varies for the subject and predicate devices.
The subject device and primary predicate have a patellar component manufactured from UHMWPE, while the material of construct of the patella of the reference predicate is unknown. The subject and both predicate devices have a locking mechanism, although the configurations and method of operation are slightly different. The locking clip for the subject device is manufactured from titanium, the reference predicate locking wire is manufactured from Co-Cr
{5}------------------------------------------------
and the material of the primary predicate is unknown. The subject and primary predicate devices have the same maximum degree of flexion (145°), while the maximum flexion of the reference predicate is slightly less (110°).
All devices are of a posterior stabilized design and none are cruciate ligament retaining devices. The subject and both predicates are shipped sterile.
The features and characteristics of the subject AK Medical A3 Total Knee System device are essentially the same as for the predicate devices with only minor differences that do not raise new questions of safety or efficacy, and all devices have the same intended use.
### Performance Data
The mechanical properties of the AK Medical A3 Total Knee System device were tested in accordance with applicable international standards. The performance testing conducted on the A3 total knee system are listed below.
- 1. The Tibial Tray Fatigue Testing.
- 2. The Wear Mechanical Performance Testing.
- 3. The Constraint Testing.
- 4. The Contact Pressure Testing.
- 5. The Shear Fatigue Testing of the Tibial Post.
- 6. Surface Roughness Analysis.
- 7. Physiological Loads Testing on Interlocking Mechanisms.
- 8. The Shear Fatigue Testing on the Patellar Component.
- 9. Patella Constraint Testing
- 10. Patella Contact Testing
- 11. Static Shear Testing of the Patellar Component
#### Conclusion
The A3 Total Knee System is substantially equivalent to other legally marketed total knee replacement predicate devices. The A3 Total Knee System has the same general intended use and substantially the same indications for use, technological characteristics, and principles of operation as the previously cleared primary predicate Biomet Vanguard Complete Knee System (K113550) and a second, reference predicate the Stryker Triathlon Posteriorly Stabilized (PS) Total Knee System (K031729). The performance testing – mechanical/bench testing – as well as the same indications for use and materials demonstrate that the A3 Total Knee System is as safe and effective as its predicate devices.
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.