Cruxi
FDA record research
The acquired FDA endpoint has no selected substantially-equivalent K-number decisions under primary product code OJP during 2021–2025. Its latest selected record across the endpoint is dated 2015-10-22. Use that dated record only as historical context. Check the recorded scope and current route separately; these data do not provide a recent timing benchmark. The complete-year window has 0 decisions; the separate all-observed-date count is 4. These denominators describe different date ranges.
Evidence retrieved 2026-10-07. Source versions and topic-specific limits are listed below.
An exact FDA-record regulation_number match to one acquired Title 21 section. Records with the same normalized scope definition, class, regulation and recorded submission/GMP flags are grouped. Sparse definitions and generic exemption boilerplate do not qualify. No text-similarity equivalence or legal applicability is inferred.
Pre-operative planning and intra-operative execution of surgical movements with robotically controlled end effectors under user supervision. Alternative to manual planning and broaching/reaming techniques for femoral canal preparation in primary total hip arthroplasty (THA).
Compare the proposed indication, user, anatomy, technology and operating principle with this actual scope; record differences and unresolved facts.
§ 882.4560 Stereotaxic instrument. (a) Identification. A stereotaxic instrument is a device consisting of a rigid frame with a calibrated guide mechanism for precisely positioning probes or other devices within a patient's brain, spinal cord, or other part of the nervous system. (b) Classification. Class II (performance standards).
Read the identification, classification, conditions and referenced limitations in the cited section. A numeric reference match is not a buyer classification or exemption determination.
Historical FDA comparison
All statistics in this section use decisions dated 2021-01-01 to 2025-12-31. The partial 2026 update below is excluded from these distributions.
There are 0 valid recent date pairs. Distribution summaries require at least 20; older records are not substituted for a current benchmark.
Statistical source: FDA openFDA 510(k) decision dataset. Partition 1 Download the identified records and dates (CSV).
Deduplicate by official submission ID across the complete current manifest partitions. Select exact primary product code, K-number format and the stated SE decision codes with valid dates. Recent distributions use the five complete calendar years preceding the latest valid endpoint decision year. Partial-year counts compare equal January-to-cutoff periods. Quartiles use linear interpolation at (n-1)*p and are withheld below 20 valid date pairs. The analysis n describes only its declared complete-year window; selected_se_n separately counts all selected recorded dates through the cutoff.
4 selected records across all observed dates; 0 other/invalid identifier or decision-date records excluded. 0 missing or invalid date pairs in the five-year window.
Date fields: date_received → decision_date. Quantiles: Hyndman–Fan type 7: linear interpolation at (n − 1) × p; displayed to one decimal; n ≥ 20 valid pairs.
Receipt-to-decision calendar elapsed time includes time outside active FDA review; it is not FDA review time, a promised project timeline or an estimate of future clearance. This selected recorded cohort does not include all applications or establish a success probability, predicate suitability, market size, current market availability or legal authorization for another product.
Calculation fda-buyer-research-3 · database cutoff 2026-09-27. CSV rows identify each official K-number, cohort, date pair, exclusion reason and source version.
Separate partial-year update
0 selected decisions from 2026-01-01 to 2026-09-27. The equivalent previous-year period contains 0 decisions through 2025-09-27. These counts describe the records; they are not market growth or submission success rates.
Named records to investigate
These dated records may come from 2026 or earlier years. They are a separate investigation list, not the five-year statistical cohort. Compare the actual indications and technology before considering a record as a comparator.
| Official record / device | Recorded applicant | Decision | Recorded type | Calendar days |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| K150741 ↗TSolution One w/ACG surgical System | THINK Surgical, Inc. | 2015-10-22 | Traditional | 213 |
| K140585 ↗CTC TCAT(R)-TPLAN(R) SURGICAL SYSTEM | Curexo Technology Corporation | 2014-08-18 | Traditional | 164 |
| K140038 ↗DIGIMATCH ORTHODOC ROBODOC ENCORE SURGICAL SYSTEM | Curexo Technology Corporation | 2014-05-27 | Traditional | 140 |
| K072629 ↗DIGIMATCH ROBODOC SURGICAL SYSTEM | Integrated Surgical Systems, Inc. | 2008-08-06 | Traditional | 324 |
Supporting documents actually acquired
Read the source context, then compare the evidence with your design. Topic locations below are text matches, including possible limitations or negative statements; they are not a mandatory test list.
The documents are a bounded sample of acquired summaries, not complete evidence coverage of the cohort.
Known context: US. Match the intended use and design with the recorded category before treating it as applicable.
| Source fact | Recorded value |
|---|---|
| FDA product code | OJP [1] |
| Generic device category | Orthopedic Computer Controlled Surgical System [1] |
| Recorded scope | Pre-operative planning and intra-operative execution of surgical movements with robotically controlled end effectors under user supervision. Alternative to manual planning and broaching/reaming techniques for femoral canal preparation in primary total hip arthroplasty (THA). [1] |
| Recorded class | 2 [1] |
| Regulation | 882.4560 [1] |
| Medical specialty | Neurology [1] |
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.
Put your proposed label and design beside the quoted definition. Record matching facts, differences and missing facts separately; naming the category alone cannot resolve scope.
Useful evidence: Proposed indication/design and a definition-to-product comparison with source locators.
Record the applicable paragraph, conditions and cross-referenced limitations after specialist review. Keep a claimed exemption separate from actual establishment, listing and quality-system responsibilities.
Useful evidence: Dated classification/route rationale and the current provisions relied on, with unresolved conditions.
No selected decision falls in the complete-year window. Any named records shown are separately dated historical or current-year research. Obtain their actual indications and assess the current route before using a comparator; the absence of a recent record does not establish an exemption or a route.
Useful evidence: Proposed indication/design, the dated named record if available, and a current route/comparator research rationale.
For each comparison, record the different materials, hardware, software functions and operating conditions. Link each difference to existing evidence or an unresolved evaluation task.
Useful evidence: A three-column matrix: comparator fact / your design fact / evidence or unresolved gap.
This recent cohort has fewer than 20 valid date pairs, so it supplies no median or percentile benchmark. Ask for a schedule based on actual preparation, evidence gaps, interactions and response assumptions; keep any historical decision context separately dated.
Useful evidence: Document/test readiness, unresolved route/evidence tasks and the assumptions behind the specialist’s proposed sequence.
Read the official document in context. The audit details identify the precise locators and preserved versions used for this page.
2026-10-05 · retrieved 2026-10-06
Source key D01 · snapshot 936de5f5d47b9293b702fc32512a79173969fb788c74a63d9b91abe73f3b86a5
2026-10-05 · retrieved 2026-10-06
Source key D01 · snapshot 5a86994ba49a37e71e09be96803fd51981c6c43eaa96caab41aea2b188bfe002
Thu, 05 Nov 2015 16:18:53 GMT · retrieved 2026-10-07
Source key D02 · snapshot d51a0edb74971fa6e1de30923efeaf072d9e1eac6e39e9dea0c596a85f84038b
Tue, 23 Sep 2014 16:21:34 GMT · retrieved 2026-10-07
Source key D02 · snapshot 1524471404b56b252d4b0b003d91c1d7dfd0124efe9278d895f3d88050fc6f16
Fri, 06 Jun 2014 15:54:19 GMT · retrieved 2026-10-07
Source key D02 · snapshot cb3a94ba88fec85fe46501f75d454b25e0adc2fcf019f8dd0fbe64ec2d5b861c
Thu, 01 Oct 2026 22:01:48 GMT · retrieved 2026-10-06
Source key D04 · snapshot 2fb992918a3879de132b47a33c856da2b3234ee3d96cfd79fab03acf30512496
Confirm the facts, scope and contact preference before sharing your project. Preparing this page sends no provider outreach.
Compare FDA 510(k) Submission Services
Find FDA US Agent Services | Compare & Get Quotes · FDA QMSR Transition & Inspection Readiness (ISO 13485 Alignment)