Cleared Traditional

K911663 - CROSSLINK SYSTEM (FDA 510(k) Clearance)

Class II Orthopedic device cleared through predicate-based substantial equivalence - typically does not require clinical trials.

K911663 · Synthes (Usa) · Orthopedic device
Download Printable Device Report (PDF)
Optimized for regulatory review, auditing and printing
Mar 1992
Decision
346d
Days
Class 2
Risk

K911663 is an FDA 510(k) clearance for the CROSSLINK SYSTEM. Classified as Appliance, Fixation, Spinal Interlaminal (product code KWP), Class II - Special Controls.

Submitted by Synthes (Usa) (Paoli, US). The FDA issued a Cleared decision on March 23, 1992 after a review of 346 days - an unusually long review period, suggesting complex equivalence evaluation.

This device falls under the Orthopedic FDA review panel, regulated under 21 CFR 888.3050 - the FDA orthopedic device regulatory framework. The Traditional 510(k) pathway establishes clearance through substantial equivalence to a legally marketed predicate device, without requiring clinical trial data.

Device pattern: Standard predicate-based submission. Elevated predicate reliance profile. This clearance follows a standard predicate-based equivalence path within the Orthopedic review framework, consistent with the majority of Class II 510(k) submissions.

View all Synthes (Usa) devices

Submission Details

510(k) Number K911663 FDA.gov
FDA Decision Cleared Substantially Equivalent - Traditional 510(k) (SESE)
Date Received April 12, 1991
Decision Date March 23, 1992
Days to Decision 346 days
Submission Type Traditional
Review Panel Orthopedic (OR)
Summary -
Third-party Review No - reviewed directly by FDA
Regulatory Context
Review time vs. panel average
224d slower than avg
Panel avg: 122d · This submission: 346d
Pathway characteristics
Predicate-based equivalence. No clinical trials required.

Device Classification

Product Code KWP Appliance, Fixation, Spinal Interlaminal
Device Class Class 2 - Special Controls
CFR Regulation 21 CFR 888.3050
What this classification means

Class II devices require demonstration of substantial equivalence to a legally marketed predicate device. This pathway does not require clinical trials - it relies on engineering equivalence and performance data. Most Orthopedic devices follow this clearance model.