Recorded device evidence

Tiger 2 System (K253943): indications, design and recorded evidence

The acquired K253943 file contains product-specific indications and users, design and operating principle, 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 2026-10-07. 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 173 selected decisions under primary code NKB. 173 have valid reported receipt/decision pairs; 0 pairs are missing or invalid.

Calendar elapsed days: lower quartile 31.0, median 63.0, upper quartile 123.0. These are recorded calendar differences, not active FDA review time.

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
K253943 ↗ · this pageTiger 2 System2025-12-10 → 2026-07-24226Traditional
K252139 ↗Kentrospine Viktr-MIS® Pedicle screw system2025-07-08 → 2026-09-27446Traditional
K262067 ↗iFuse Granite Onyx™ Implant System2026-06-22 → 2026-09-2393Traditional
K262091 ↗FRAXION Spinal Fixation System2026-06-22 → 2026-09-1787Traditional
K262193 ↗RIVA® Posterior Fixation System with NanoACTIV Surface Technology; RIVA® Anchor Sacroiliac Fixation System with NanoACTIV Surface Technology2026-06-29 → 2026-09-1477Traditional

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; 0 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

K253943 · PDF page 6 ↗ Source 2

Read this statement in the original PDF; no complete statement fits the short excerpt.

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.

Design and operating principle

K253943 · PDF page 5 ↗ Source 3

The Tiger                                                                                                       2 System                                                                  is comprised of pedicle screws, rods, hooks, rod connectors
and                                                                             cross connectors. The                          Tiger 2 System can be used for                                                            single or multiple level fixations.

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 physical design, materials, energy, accessories and operating principle with your design. Ask which documented differences change the evidence scope.

Recorded comparison and differences

K253943 · PDF page 6 ↗ Source 2

The Tiger 2 System possesses the same technological characteristics as the predicate device.

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

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

K253943 · PDF page 6 ↗ Source 2

Mechanical testing was complet                      ed on the               Tiger 2 System worst case              construct per ASTM F1717 (static
and dynamic compression bending).       Additionally, bone cement injection testing was performed.

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: {'uncertain_pdf_page': 1}.

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) identifierK253943 [1]Dated official record fact; not proof of current commercial availability or applicability to another device.
Generic device categoryTiger 2 System [1]Dated official record fact; not proof of current commercial availability or applicability to another device.
Recorded applicantZavation Medical Products, LLC [1]Dated official record fact; not proof of current commercial availability or applicability to another device.
FDA product codeNKB [1]Dated official record fact; not proof of current commercial availability or applicability to another device.
Decision date2026-07-24 [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 typeTraditional [1]Dated official record fact; not proof of current commercial availability or applicability to another device.
Receipt date2025-12-10 [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. Design and operating principle — what differs in our product?

    Compare physical design, materials, energy, accessories and operating principle with your design. Ask which documented differences change the evidence scope.

    Useful evidence: Design description, materials/components, accessory list and a differences matrix.

  3. 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.

  4. 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[135426] · record 5145455a10e1d08f0bca62f7c63c39d4c79e2cd3d4895cadaf39d86a5fc192ea
  • [4] Complete results array / fda-decision-context:K253943 · record whole dataset partition

FDA 510(k) summary — K253943 ↗

Fri, 07 Aug 2026 21:33:37 GMT · retrieved 2026-10-07

Audit details: precise locators and snapshot identifiers

Source key D02 · snapshot 3afa42f5415671a7e2970fe6243bccffeede1aa5b76ceca20fa92861d1205ae0

  • [2] PDF page 6 · record 78cc1ea68cbf8c2928642e0c24062b2634597ed6b3b1173dc0092685f3d167d0
  • [3] PDF page 5 · record a553d73a0a2a560aad94a0a5468c88228f1247fa1ef0ab90d68b0f9b09d23029

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