Recorded device evidence

Aequalis PerFORM+ Shoulder System (K160975): indications, design and recorded evidence

The acquired K160975 file contains product-specific indications and users, recorded comparison and differences, performance evidence actually described sections. Compare these dated manufacturer statements with your own indication and design before commissioning evidence work. They describe this submission; they do not prescribe your testing, validate performance independently or establish a suitable predicate.

Evidence retrieved 2026-10-08. Source versions and topic-specific limits are listed below.

Computed exact-code research

This decision beside its recorded product-code cohort

The 2021–2025 complete-year cohort contains 19 selected decisions under primary code KWS. 19 have valid reported receipt/decision pairs; 0 pairs are missing or invalid.

No quartiles are displayed: this complete-year cohort has fewer than 20 valid pairs.

The table shows the named decision and up to four latest exact-code research records through 2026-09-27. It can include partial-year records outside the complete-year cohort. The quartiles above use the full stated cohort, not this displayed selection.

Research recordRecorded deviceReceipt → decisionCalendar elapsed daysRecorded submission type
K160975 ↗ · this pageAequalis PerFORM+ Shoulder System2016-04-07 → 2016-06-1064Special
K260721 ↗Tornier Perform Advanced Glenoid2026-03-05 → 2026-07-22139Traditional
K254084 ↗AETOS Shoulder System - CONCELOC Glenoids2025-12-18 → 2026-04-06109Traditional
K252418 ↗Catalyst F1x Shoulder System2025-08-01 → 2025-11-0697Traditional
K252416 ↗AETOS Shoulder System Meta Humeral Prosthesis Size 02025-08-01 → 2025-10-2989Traditional

Use this comparison: select a record to investigate, read its actual indications and design, and document differences. A shared code or elapsed period cannot establish its relevance to your device.

Calendar elapsed days are not active FDA review time, a promised schedule or a success probability. The selection includes only the stated recorded decisions, not all applications. Latest records can postdate the named historical decision and are contextual research, not its predicates. Shared codes, summaries and observed records do not prove equivalence, current market availability, buyer applicability or predicate suitability.

Calculation, selection and source versions

Reuse the complete-endpoint exact-primary-code, documented SE-decision cohort and its stated cutoff/window. Retain its type-7 quartiles only when at least 20 valid date pairs are present. Independently subtract the named official record’s receipt date from its decision date; missing or negative pairs remain unknown. Show up to four latest exact-code research records, excluding the named ID. Parent analysis hash, source snapshots and calculation versions are retained.

Calculation: fda-named-decision-cohort-context-1; cutoff 2026-09-27; 6 parent records excluded; units record counts; calendar elapsed days.

Source snapshots: 5a86994ba49a37e71e09be96803fd51981c6c43eaa96caab41aea2b188bfe002.

Read beyond the decision row

Recorded evidence and differences to investigate

The summary is manufacturer-submitted context hosted by FDA. Negative/no-study statements are preserved. Evidence themes are not binding legal requirements.

Short opening excerpts identify the source sections. Read the linked original for the full study context, negative statements, tables and limitations. Public quotations are limited to 120 words per acquired summary; the internal evidence packet retains exact section ranges for review.

Indications and users

K160975 · PDF page 5 ↗ Source 2

Prosthetic replacement with this device (Aequalis PerFORM+ glenoid component and humeral
component) may be indicated to relieve severe pain or significant disability caused by:
                                                                                       Degenerative pathologies: arthrosis, rheumatoid arthritis, post-traumatic arthrosis.

The excerpt is shortened at a complete statement. Read the complete section in the original PDF before interpreting the evidence.

Compare with your product: Compare the recorded indication, population, body site and use environment with your proposed label. Record each change instead of assuming the primary code settles intended use.

Recorded comparison and differences

K160975 · PDF page 5 ↗ Source 2

The Aequalis PerFORM+ Shoulder System has the same intended use and fundamental scientific
technology as the predicate device.  The design differences do not affect safety or effectiveness or raise
new issues of safety or effectiveness.

Compare with your product: The summary’s comparison is a manufacturer statement about that submission. Investigate the actual design differences and cited records before considering any comparator or predicate.

Performance evidence actually described

K160975 · PDF page 5 ↗ Source 2

Validation and / or                                                                Acceptance Value / Criteria                                                                                                                               Results
   Verification Method
   Loosening Test                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     No Loosening detected at completion of test.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   Acceptable
   Shear testing                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            Comparable to the predicate device design.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              Acceptable
   Tensile (pull out) testing                                                                                                                                   Comparable to the predicate device design.

Compare with your product: The source labels this section as performance data. Determine which described evidence is bench, software, biological or clinical from the actual narrative and original tables; the section label alone does not settle that distinction or prescribe your testing.

Extraction selection and limits

Select observed whole-line section headings or explicit colon-delimited inline labels on readable PDF pages, including the explicitly documented heading-spacing variants in this parser version. Preserve the original heading, character ranges and layout; do not repair excerpt text. Exclude letter boilerplate and uncertain pages. Stop at observed table headings; do not infer table columns or scalar results from layout text. Multi-column or suspicious split-numeric excerpts are excluded until reviewed alternate extraction is available. Original layout records remain retained; any alternate text has its own extractor-version locator and requires original-page review. For each dimension, prefer usable versioned alternate text where available, selecting its longest usable excerpt; otherwise select the longest usable original-layout excerpt. Ties preserve source order. Bounded to 64 PDF pages and 3,500 characters per section. This is a selection, not a complete dossier analysis.

Excluded extraction items: {}.

Known facts and deciding inputs

Known context: US. Confirm the organisation’s role, relevant activities and markets against the cited criteria.

Source factRecorded valueWhat to check
510(k) identifierK160975 [1]Dated official record fact; not proof of current commercial availability or applicability to another device.
Generic device categoryAequalis PerFORM+ Shoulder System [1]Dated official record fact; not proof of current commercial availability or applicability to another device.
Recorded applicantTornier, Inc. [1]Dated official record fact; not proof of current commercial availability or applicability to another device.
FDA product codeKWS [1]Dated official record fact; not proof of current commercial availability or applicability to another device.
Decision date2016-06-10 [1]Dated official record fact; not proof of current commercial availability or applicability to another device.
Recorded decision codeSESE [1]Dated official record fact; not proof of current commercial availability or applicability to another device.
Submission typeSpecial [1]Dated official record fact; not proof of current commercial availability or applicability to another device.
Receipt date2016-04-07 [1]Dated official record fact; not proof of current commercial availability or applicability to another device.

Prepare a differences and evidence worksheet

Use this checklist to gather your business or product details before speaking with a specialist. The items below explain what to record and suggest useful supporting documents. You can add your own answers in the editable project brief.

  1. Indications and users — what differs in our product?

    Compare the recorded indication, population, body site and use environment with your proposed label. Record each change instead of assuming the primary code settles intended use.

    Useful evidence: Our proposed indication, user/population and use environment beside this exact recorded indication.

  2. Recorded comparison and differences — what differs in our product?

    The summary’s comparison is a manufacturer statement about that submission. Investigate the actual design differences and cited records before considering any comparator or predicate.

    Useful evidence: Feature-by-feature differences and the underlying cited documents; no automated predicate selection.

  3. Performance evidence actually described — what differs in our product?

    The source labels this section as performance data. Determine which described evidence is bench, software, biological or clinical from the actual narrative and original tables; the section label alone does not settle that distinction or prescribe your testing.

    Useful evidence: The cited narrative and full tables, underlying protocols/results and a reviewed comparison with the proposed product.

Work packages and dependencies

Questions for providers

Sources and data dates

Read the official document in context. The audit details identify the precise locators and preserved versions used for this page.

FDA openFDA — 510(k) decision records ↗

2026-10-05 · retrieved 2026-10-06

Audit details: precise locators and snapshot identifiers

Source key D01 · snapshot 5a86994ba49a37e71e09be96803fd51981c6c43eaa96caab41aea2b188bfe002

  • [1] device-510k-0001-of-0001.json:results[172376] · record a16675465776fa503c49f78904849e4565f5b91e004ef72acf1bc23132d235d2
  • [3] Complete results array / fda-decision-context:K160975 · record whole dataset partition

FDA 510(k) summary — K160975 ↗

Tue, 05 Jul 2016 05:12:29 GMT · retrieved 2026-10-08

Audit details: precise locators and snapshot identifiers

Source key D02 · snapshot 88992a4ae99848f315be12fab59dfedf4e4739aa7b6c5f124bd25b0b5884e558

  • [2] PDF page 5 · record 01216a2190242a7c533de6ea55cddf377ee7496082e89884d1d19050d4271ca5

Prepare an editable project brief

Confirm the facts, scope and contact preference before sharing your project. Preparing this page sends no provider outreach.

Choose work packages to discuss

Compare FDA 510(k) Submission Services