K193042 · Corin USA · LLZ · Jun 26, 2020 · Radiology
Device Facts
Record ID
K193042
Device Name
Optimized Positioning System (OPS) ReView
Applicant
Corin USA
Product Code
LLZ · Radiology
Decision Date
Jun 26, 2020
Decision
SESE
Submission Type
Traditional
Regulation
21 CFR 892.2050
Device Class
Class 2
Attributes
Software as a Medical Device
Indications for Use
OPSReView™ is intended to be used as a postoperative tool for visualising and quantifying component alignment to aid in the analysis of hip alignment following hip replacement surgery. OPSReView™ provides the surgeon with information to the in-situ implant placement as well as associated functional analysis and 3D biomechanical measurements, based on landmarks derived from patient specific postoperative imaging.
Device Story
OPSReView is a postoperative image analysis tool for hip replacement surgery; inputs include patient-specific postoperative CT and X-ray imaging. Device processes imaging data using a controlled database of 3D implant geometry and landmarks to calculate in-situ implant orientation, pelvic parameters, and functional biomechanical measurements. Output is a static PDF report provided to the surgeon. Used in clinical settings by trained medical professionals to assess implant alignment and functional orientation. Information assists surgeons in evaluating surgical outcomes and patient hip biomechanics. Device does not contact the patient.
Clinical Evidence
No clinical data. Bench testing performed to assess device accuracy, report usability, and software functionality.
Technological Characteristics
Image analysis software; utilizes postoperative CT and X-ray inputs; generates static PDF reports. Operates via controlled database of 3D implant geometry and landmarks. No patient contact. Software-based analysis.
Indications for Use
Indicated for postoperative analysis of hip replacement surgery patients to visualize and quantify component alignment, in-situ implant placement, and functional biomechanical measurements.
Regulatory Classification
Identification
A medical image management and processing system is a device that provides one or more capabilities relating to the review and digital processing of medical images for the purposes of interpretation by a trained practitioner of disease detection, diagnosis, or patient management. The software components may provide advanced or complex image processing functions for image manipulation, enhancement, or quantification that are intended for use in the interpretation and analysis of medical images. Advanced image manipulation functions may include image segmentation, multimodality image registration, or 3D visualization. Complex quantitative functions may include semi-automated measurements or time-series measurements.
Special Controls
*Classification.* Class II (special controls; voluntary standards—Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine (DICOM) Std., Joint Photographic Experts Group (JPEG) Std., Society of Motion Picture and Television Engineers (SMPTE) Test Pattern).
{0}------------------------------------------------
Image /page/0/Picture/0 description: The image contains the logos of the Department of Health & Human Services and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The Department of Health & Human Services logo is on the left, and the FDA logo is on the right. The FDA logo includes the agency's name, "U.S. Food & Drug Administration," in blue text.
June 26, 2020
Corin USA % Ms. Martina Cecconi Regulatory and Clinical Affairs Team Leader Corin (Australia) 17 Bridge Street Sydney, New South Wales 2073 AUSTRALIA
Re: K193042
Trade/Device Name: Optimized Positioning System (OPS) ReView Regulation Number: 21 CFR 892.2050 Regulation Name: Picture archiving and communications system Regulatory Class: Class II Product Code: LLZ, LZO, MEH, LWJ, PLW Dated: June 9, 2020 Received: June 10, 2020
Dear Ms. Cecconi:
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. Although this letter refers to your product as a device, please be aware that some cleared products may instead be combination products. The 510(k) Premarket Notification Database located at https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfpmn/pmn.cfm identifies combination product submissions. 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
{1}------------------------------------------------
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) for devices or postmarketing safety reporting (21 CFR 4, Subpart B) for combination products (see https://www.fda.gov/combination-products/guidance-regulatory-information/postmarketing-safety-reportingcombination-products); good manufacturing practice requirements as set forth in the quality systems (OS) regulation (21 CFR Part 820) for devices or current good manufacturing practices (21 CFR 4, Subpart A) for combination products; 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 https://www.fda.gov/medical-device-safety/medical-device-reportingmdr-how-report-medical-device-problems.
For comprehensive regulatory information about mediation-emitting products, including information about labeling regulations, please see Device Advice (https://www.fda.gov/medicaldevices/device-advice-comprehensive-regulatory-assistance) and CDRH Learn (https://www.fda.gov/training-and-continuing-education/cdrh-learn). 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 (https://www.fda.gov/medical-device-advice-comprehensive-regulatoryassistance/contact-us-division-industry-and-consumer-education-dice) for more information or contact DICE by email (DICE@fda.hhs.gov) or phone (1-800-638-2041 or 301-796-7100).
Sincerely,
Thalia T. Mills, Ph.D. Director Division of Radiological Health OHT7: Office of In Vitro Diagnostics and Radiological Health Office of Product Evaluation and Quality Center for Devices and Radiological Health
Enclosure
{2}------------------------------------------------
# Indications for Use
510(k) Number (if known) K193042
Device Name Optimized Positioning System (OPS) ReView
Indications for Use (Describe)
OPSReView™ is intended to be used as a postoperative tool for visualising and quantifying component alignment to aid in the analysis of hip alignment following hip replacement surgery.
OPSReView™ provides the surgeon with information to the in-situ implant placement as well as associated functional analysis and 3D biomechanical measurements, based on landmarks derived from patient specific postoperative imaging.
Type of Use (Select one or both, as applicable)
| <span style="font-family: DejaVu Sans, sans-serif">☑</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 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
#### K193042
| 1. Applicant/Sponsor: | Corin USA Limited |
|-----------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------|
| Distributor | 12750 Citrus Park Lane<br>Suite 120<br>Tampa, Florida 33625 |
| | Establishment Registration No.: 1056629 |
- 2. Manufacturer: Optimized Ortho Pty Ltd 17 Bridge Street Pymble NSW 2073 Australia Establishment Registration No: 3012916784
- 3. Contact Person: Crissy Tomarelli Quality & Regulatory Director - Australia Corin Australia 0011 61 2 94977400 crissy.tomarelli@coringroup.com
Lucinda Gerber Global Regulatory Affairs Manager Corin USA Limited 1 (772) 321-2478 Lucinda.Gerber@coringroup.com
- 4. Date: Tuesday, June 9, 2020
- 5. Trade Name: Optimized Positioning System (OPS™) ReView
- OPSReView™ 6. Common Name:
- 7. Classification Product Code(s): LLZ
Additional Product Code(s): LZO, MEH, LWJ, PLW
- 8. Classification Name:
{4}------------------------------------------------
21 CFR 892.2050 – Picture archiving and communications
Additional Classification Names:
21 CFR 888.3353 – Hip joint metal/ceramic/polymer semi-constrained cemented or nonporous uncemented prosthesis.
21 CFR 888.3350 - Hip joint metal/polymer semi-constrained cemented Prosthesis
# 9. Substantially Equivalent (predicate) device(s):
- Eos Imaging SterEOS Workstation (K172346). .
- . Corin OPS™ Plan (K171847, K183038).
- . Corin OPS™ FHA (K190834)
# 10. Device Description:
OPSReView™ is an image analysis tool that provides surgeons with postoperative information regarding the femoral stem and acetabular cup orientations and patient pelvic parameters following hip replacement surgery. OPSReView™ is provided to the surgeon in the form of a static PDF report that displays the results of the analysis and uses post-operative CT and X-ray imaging as inputs.
The information provided in the OPS™ ReView report includes the patient's pelvic parameters, in-situ implant measurement describing the in-situ implant placement and post-operative radiographic images.
The implant parameters, including 3D geometry and associated landmarks, required to calculate the in-situ implant measurements are contained within a controlled database.
## 11. Indications for Use / Intended Purpose:
OPSReView™ is intended to be used as a postoperative tool for visualising and quantifying component alignment to aid in the analysis of hip alignment following hip replacement surgery.
OPSReView™ provides the surgeon with information relating to the in-situ implant placement as well as associated functional analysis and 3D biomechanical measurements, based on landmarks derived from patient specific postoperative imaging.
{5}------------------------------------------------
## 12. Summary of Technologies/Substantial Equivalence:
The device comparison showed that the subject device is substantially equivalent to the predicate the EOS Imaging SterEOS Workstation (K172346), Corin OPS™ Plan (K171847, K183038) and Corin OPS™ FHA (K190834). The subject device and SterEOS Workstation (K172346) can both be used as a postoperative tool to provide an image-based analysis and associated measurements of a patient's hip. The subject device and Corin OPS™ Plan (K171847, K183038) can both be used as tool to provide an image-based analysis of a patient's hip. The subject device and the Corin OPS™ FHA (K190834) both provide calculated outputs of the hip joint during functional activities and information about functional orientation of the acetabular cup.
The subject device and predicate devices EOS Imaging SterEOS Workstation (K172346), Corin OPS™ Plan (K171847, K183038) and Corin OPS™ FHA (K190834), have similar technological characteristics and principles of operation, all utilizing imaging scans to generate a patient specific report. The end user for the subject and predicate devices are trained medical professionals and the subject and predicate devices do not have contact with the patient. Based on these similarities, Corin believes that the OPS™ ReView is substantially equivalent to the predicate devices.
## 13. Non-Clinical Testing:
Non-clinical testing was performed to assess the accuracy of the device, the usability of the OPS™ ReView report provided to the Surgeon, and to demonstrate that the software utilized in the device functions as intended.
#### 14. Clinical Testing:
Clinical testing was not necessary for this Traditional 510(k).
#### 15. Conclusion:
The subject device has similar intended uses, technological characteristics, and principles of operation as its predicate devices. The differences between the subject device and its predicates raise no new issues in terms of safety or effectiveness.
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.