Regulatory Open Forum

 View Only
Expand all | Collapse all

MDR deadline for Class I devices

  • 1.  MDR deadline for Class I devices

    Posted 01-Aug-2019 12:03
    Is there any indication that the May 26, 2020 deadline for Class I MDD devices to be compliant with the MDR might be extended or modified? And this deadline is more difficult for those Class I MDD devices that will be up-classified to Class IIa or higher by the MDR rules and thus require a Notified Body CE certificate.

    Thanks, Padraig


    ------------------------------
    Padraig Maguire
    Head of Quality & Regulatory Affairs, S3 Connected Health
    Dublin
    Ireland
    ------------------------------


  • 2.  RE: MDR deadline for Class I devices

    Posted 02-Aug-2019 03:22
    Hi Padraig, there is no indication whatsoever that te May 26, 2020 deadline will be extended or modified. Concerns from various involved parties have been published to no effect until today. I can only advice you to communicate with your Notified Body as closely as possible to arrange for a suitable MDR CE certification.​

    ------------------------------
    Peter Reijntjes
    Principal Consultant Regulatory & Quality Affairs
    Arnhem
    Netherlands
    ------------------------------



  • 3.  RE: MDR deadline for Class I devices

    Posted 02-Aug-2019 03:31
    Hi Padraig,

    class I devices and up-classified class I devices (e.g. class Ir reprocessing etc.) have a major disadvantage against all other devices (IIa, IIb and III)  which can still be CE marked and put into the EU market depnding on the validity date of their current MDD certificate. As you mentioned, class 1 and up-classified class I devices must fulfill the MDR in May 2020.

    The discussion about this disadvantage already started and it seems to me, that number of people and organisations supporting an extension of the May 2020 deadline, are steadily increasing. If the EC Commisison will react to this discussion and how they might react, is absolutely unknown at the moment.

    ------------------------------
    Klaus-Dieter Ziel
    Hamburg
    Germany
    ------------------------------



  • 4.  RE: MDR deadline for Class I devices

    Posted 04-Aug-2019 21:18
    What does the MDR require the EC itself to do by May 2020?

    ------------------------------
    Julie Omohundro, ex-RAC (US, GS), still an MBA
    Principal Consultant
    Class Three, LLC
    Mebane, North Carolina, USA
    919-544-3366 (T)
    434-964-1614 (C)
    julie@class3devices.com
    ------------------------------



  • 5.  RE: MDR deadline for Class I devices

    Posted 08-Aug-2019 14:33
    Publish common specs and harmonized standards, set up EUDAMED (although this seems to have been postponed to 2021) and have enough MDR certified NBs, to begin with...

    ------------------------------
    Vidya
    USA
    ------------------------------



  • 6.  RE: MDR deadline for Class I devices

    Posted 08-Aug-2019 17:14

    As I understand the MDR (meaning I don't think I know), the MDR empowers the EC to publish harmonized standards and common specifications; it does not require it to do so.  Also, as I understand it, conformance to the standards is not required under the MDR, any more than it was require under the MDD.

    As for Eudamed, all I know is what I've read by Richard Houlihan:

    https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/eudamed-myths-misinformation-richard-houlihan/

    I'm really pretty sure that the MDR does not require the EC to designate any NBs, but only to provide its recommendation to the CAs.  I'm not clear that it requires CAs to designate any NBs either, but seems only to authorize them to do so, if they are so inclined.

    I don't see any reason for the EC to care how many people and organizations support an extension.

    I will be as interested as anyone to see how this all plays out, but so far I've not found any motivation for the EC to delay any part of the MDR,



    ------------------------------
    Julie Omohundro, ex-RAC (US, GS), still an MBA
    Principal Consultant
    Class Three, LLC
    Mebane, North Carolina, USA
    919-544-3366 (T)
    434-964-1614 (C)
    julie@class3devices.com
    ------------------------------



  • 7.  RE: MDR deadline for Class I devices

    Posted 09-Aug-2019 04:27
    Nope, no indication or movement this would be delayed.  In the last 3 or so public statements by Erik Hansson as basically boiled down to: everything is on track for compliance.  I will reserve any other statements because working primarily in EU MDR transitions last couple years, just the math alone does not add up to how this will all be possible.  If you are a Class I, Reusable Surgical Instrument company or some of these software only applications now needing to "upgrade" to EU MDR by 26 May 2020 - only thing I can offer is good luck !

    ------------------------------
    Richard Vincins RAC
    Vice President Global Regulatory Affairs
    ------------------------------



  • 8.  RE: MDR deadline for Class I devices

    Posted 09-Aug-2019 10:29
    Richard, I think the key question is compliance with what, and by whom. 

    For the EC, it seems to me that compliance will not only be possible, but that the EC may have already complied with pretty much everything it has to comply with.  It may have plans to do more, but it's not clear to me that it has to do more in order to comply.  Same thing with the CAs. 

    Whether the industry is on track to comply, I will quote Houlihan:

    The EC will not delay its timetable to suit industry. We have to remember the EC remit is to produce and implement directives and regulations. The EC's role is not to facilitate companies who have not planned nor started the required projects to implement these directives and regulations. The EC and the member states view is that the companies have had plenty of warning, the MDR existence is no surprise and Eudamed is coming in March 2020. Companies failure to plan, prepare, and implement their IT projects is not an issue for the EC, these are issues for the industry and the relevant companies. Recently the Commissioner for health and food safety, Vytenis Andriukaitis said, "any change of rules at this late stage would be unfair to serious operators that have carried efforts to ensure their timely compliance."

    I am in no position to know whether this is spin or solid information, but I look forward to finding out.  (Another interesting aspect of all of this is that it has presented a historic opportunity to assess the credibility of a wide range of information sources within the medical device space.)


    ------------------------------
    Julie Omohundro, ex-RAC (US, GS), still an MBA
    Principal Consultant
    Class Three, LLC
    Mebane, North Carolina, USA
    919-544-3366 (T)
    434-964-1614 (C)
    julie@class3devices.com
    ------------------------------



  • 9.  RE: MDR deadline for Class I devices

    Posted 10-Aug-2019 14:44
    I'm pretty sure I read omewhere (!) that, even though devices currently CE Marked under the MDD can be put into the EU market past May 2020, they must still fulfill the MDR as of May 2020.  Can anyone speak to the truth of this?  And also, if it is true, can someone explain exactly what it means, to continue to be CE Marked under the MDD and fulfill the MDR?

    ------------------------------
    Julie Omohundro, ex-RAC (US, GS), still an MBA
    Principal Consultant
    Class Three, LLC
    Mebane, North Carolina, USA
    919-544-3366 (T)
    434-964-1614 (C)
    julie@class3devices.com
    ------------------------------



  • 10.  RE: MDR deadline for Class I devices

    Posted 10-Aug-2019 17:14

    Julie, what you describe is not true because it is only part of the story. The situation you are describing is variously called the "soft transition" or the "Article 120 transition" and is covered by EU-MDR Article 120.

    A device with an MDD CE Mark can stay on the market in the EU as long as the manufacturer meets a set of conditions:

    The MDD NB agrees to act as the NB during the transition and conducts surveillance audits

    The device has an NB certificate that is valid for at least part of the transition period (May 2020 to May 2024)

    The manufacturer does not make significant changes to the device

    The manufacturer does not make significant changes to the intended use

    The manufacturer registers the device in Eudamed

    The manufacturer registers economic operators in Eudamed

    The manufacturer implements the post-market surveillance system in the EU-MDR instead of the MDD PMS system

    The manufacturer implements the market surveillance system in the EU-MDR instead of the MDD system

    The manufacturer implements the vigilance system in EU-MDR instead of the MDD system

    The device must meet the MDD requirements. The manufacturer's QMS must a hybrid with some elements from the MDD and some from the EU-MDR. The hybrid QMS applies to the device.

    There are a few issues as a result of these requirements.

    MDD NBs often need to extend device certificates requiring an additional audit. This is a capacity problem for the NB.

    Some MDD NBs have ceased operations leaving "orphan" manufacturers without a valid certificate.

    A device without a valid MDD NB certificate is not eligible for the Article 120 transition, so must go directly to the MDR. This includes general MDR Class I devices and devices that are Class I under the MDD but are a higher class under the EU-MDR.

    I did a webinar for FDA News on this topic. I understand they are now offering as a free on-demand webinar. They are at www.FDANEWS.com.




    ------------------------------
    Dan O'Leary CQA, CQE
    Swanzey NH
    United States
    ------------------------------



  • 11.  RE: MDR deadline for Class I devices

    Posted 11-Aug-2019 12:25
    Thanks, Dan.  If I had to characterize the majority of information that I've seen disseminated about the new EU regs, "only part of the story" pretty much nails it.

    I appreciate the link and will post it around the internet a bit myself, if that's okay with you.

    ------------------------------
    Julie Omohundro, ex-RAC (US, GS), still an MBA
    Principal Consultant
    Class Three, LLC
    Mebane, North Carolina, USA
    919-544-3366 (T)
    434-964-1614 (C)
    julie@class3devices.com
    ------------------------------



  • 12.  RE: MDR deadline for Class I devices

    Posted 10-Aug-2019 13:14

    In my opinion applying a CE Mark to an MDR Class I device, in general, is the most simple path.

    There is no need for harmonized standards, Notified Bodies, etc. A manufacturer of a general Class I could complete the work and apply the CE Mark. There are no restrictions.

    A complication arises if the Class I device has one of the attributes that requires Notified Body involvement. Then the manufacturer needs an EU-MDR NB.

    It is not clear to me, I've seen discussions on both sides, whether an MDD Class I device with a measuring function or delivered sterile has an NB certificate that qualifies for the EU-MDR Article 120 transition. I think each NB is developing its own position.

    Devices that require an EU-MDR NB but didn't require an MDD NB are a problem because of the small number of EU-MDR NBs. They are not eligible for the Article 120 transition.



    ------------------------------
    Dan O'Leary CQA, CQE
    Swanzey NH
    United States
    ------------------------------