New Regulation on In Vitro Diagnostic Medical Devices in Spain: Are You Ready?

Are you ready for the new regulation on In Vitro Diagnostic medical devices in Spain? Learn everything you need to know about it.

The in vitro diagnostic medical device sector plays an important role in healthcare by providing instruments and solutions for illness diagnosis and monitoring. Regulatory agencies regularly update and adopt new regulations to maintain the safety and effectiveness of these products.

Recently, the public consultation process for the new regulation on In Vitro diagnostic medical devices in Spain, replacing the previous Royal Decree 1662/2000, has been completed.

The proposed text’s draft can be accessed on the website of the Spanish Ministry of Health. The new decree aims to adopt the required regulatory measures in areas where Regulation (EU) 2017/746 allows member states to establish national regulations.

These regulations address key aspects such as manufacturer licensing, clinical studies, and the production of in vitro diagnostic devices for exclusive use in healthcare facilities.

New Regulation on In Vitro Diagnostic Medical Devices: 5 Key aspects

1. Operating License

The new regulation on In Vitro diagnostic medical devices, like the previous one, requires manufacturers, importers, and now those who make finished products for third parties to get a prior operating licence.

To assure product quality and the execution of key procedures and controls, manufacturers must have a quality management system in place. They must also have suitable facilities, procedures, equipment, and personnel for the corresponding activities and products.

The new regulation maintains the figure of the technical responsible person, who must have a minimum higher education degree.

Although the requirements and duties of the technical responsible are not the same as those of the personnel responsible for regulatory compliance as set out in Regulation (EU) 2017/746, they may be covered by the same person if they meet all the requirements.

2. Registration and Marketing Obligations

The second key aspect of the new regulation for In Vitro diagnostic medical devices makes a reference to registration and marketing obligations.

Before beginning their activities, any economic operator seeking to market products in Spain has to register in the Commercialization registration of the Spanish Agency of Medicines and Medical Devices.

Economic operators must keep written records of the products they make available in Spain and must notify the regulator of any changes in this information or cessation of activity. This registration is required to assure the traceability and safety of the product.

Economic operators must disclose information in Spanish if health authorities make a justified request, but they may submit documentation in other languages to demonstrate product conformity. Importers and distributors must get the necessary documentation from the manufacturer or authorised representative if it is not available.

The new regulation for in vitro diagnostic medical devices mandates the creation of a document archive system to store the documentation generated for each product and to keep a record of all products for traceability purposes.

Manufacturers must make the records available to relevant authorities for at least ten years following the product’s last market release, even in extreme situations such as bankruptcy or the suspension of business.

These requirements ensure that manufacturers maintain rigorous control over the quality and safety of their products and facilitate supervision by authorities. It is important to note that some of these obligations do not apply to pharmacies, as they have their own records.

3. In-House Product Manufacturing

The manufacturing of in-house products in health institutions is subject to strict regulations under the new regulation for in vitro diagnostic medical devices to ensure product safety and quality. In line with Regulation (EU) 2017/746, the new text recognizes that all health institutions can carry out the manufacturing of in vitro diagnostic devices for exclusive use within those centres, not limited to hospitals as it is the case with medical devices.

However, to do so, they must comply with all the requirements established in Article 5(5) of the Regulation (EU) 2017/746. It is important to mention that health institutions cannot subcontract manufacturing outside Spanish territory.

Additionally, they must designate a responsible person for manufacturing procedures and communicate their data to the Spanish Agency of Medicines and Medical Devices. This ensures traceability and regulatory compliance in the manufacturing process.

The sale of products manufactured in these centres to the public or third parties is not permitted. Moreover, health institutions must provide prior communication of the start of manufacturing activities, providing detailed information and complying with the required documentation.

The agency can conduct subsequent verifications and inspections to ensure compliance.

4. Performance Studies

The new regulation for in vitro diagnostic medical devices addresses the requirements and procedures related to clinical performance studies in the field of in vitro diagnostic medical devices. Ethical and subject protection principles must apply to these studies.

Products intended for clinical performance evaluation studies must receive approval from the Research Ethics Committee and the centre’s management before they can begin. Interventional clinical performance studies and other functional performance studies involving risks to test subjects require authorization from the AEMPS (Spanish Agency of Medicines and Medical Devices).

The text establishes provisions regarding documentation, product supply, insurance, compensation for damages, and liability regime for sponsors.

5. Market Surveillance and Control

The system of market surveillance and control is essential for ensuring the safety and quality of in vitro diagnostic medical devices according to the new regulation for in vitro diagnostic medical devices.

Manufacturers, healthcare professionals, authorities, and users play a crucial role in this process, working together to protect public health and ensure regulatory compliance.

Manufacturers must report incidents in accordance with established protocols. Additionally, healthcare professionals, authorities, and users have the responsibility to report serious incidents to the Spanish Agency of Medicines and Medical Devices. Health institutions must designate a surveillance responsible person and communicate their data to the relevant health authorities.

Manufacturers must also report safety corrective actions and provide information in Spanish to ensure effective dissemination. The Spanish Agency of Medicines and Medical Devices coordinates market control activities in collaboration with regional health authorities, including periodic inspections.

Other specific aspects and details are regulated by this regulation, such as the use of products that have not yet demonstrated conformity or aspects related to genetic testing.

It is important underlying the significance of regulatory compliance and quality in the manufacture of these products, as well as how a regulatory, quality, and clinical consultancy service organisation may be a strategic ally in this highly regulated and ever-changing environment.

We must be prepared to comply with the royal decree once the parliamentary procedures are concluded and the new regulation for in vitro diagnostic medical devices is authorised.

How can MDx CRO help?

Are you finding it challenging to navigate the complexities of the new in vitro diagnostic medical device regulations in Spain? Is the realm of IVD consulting seeming increasingly vital to your business? Look no further than MDx CRO, your dedicated partner in this journey.

With a team of experienced IVD consultants, we provide robust solutions for regulatory, quality, and clinical consultancy services tailored to your needs. As your IVD consultancy partner, we offer comprehensive assistance in manufacturer licensing, clinical studies, and production compliance, ensuring your business aligns seamlessly with the new Royal Decree and Regulation (EU) 2017/746.

Don’t let regulatory hurdles stand in the way of your company’s success. Embrace the change, and navigate this evolving landscape with confidence and ease by leveraging MDx CRO’s expertise.

For a no-obligation discussion on how we can assist you in maintaining your market competitiveness within the IVD sector, contact us today. Let us be your strategic ally in this highly regulated environment, ensuring your continued growth and success.

Industry Insights & Regulatory Updates

Impact of Spain’s Real Decreto 192/2023 on Clinical Investigations with Medical Devices

The field of medical devices is continually evolving, with new technologies and innovative products constantly being developed to improve patient care and enhance the practice of medicine. To ensure the safety and performance of these devices, clinical investigations must adhere to strict ethical and methodological standards. In Spain, the regulatory landscape governing clinical investigations of medical devices has recently undergone significant changes with the introduction of Real Decreto 192/2023. This decree implements EU Regulation 2017/745 on medical devices, aiming to provide a robust and harmonized framework for the conduct of clinical investigations.

The Real Decreto 192/2023 emphasizes the importance of conducting clinical investigations that adhere to high ethical standards, robust methodological approaches, and the protection of trial subjects. It does so by incorporating the principles outlined in the Real Decreto 1090/2015, which regulates clinical trials with medicinal products, as well as specific provisions from EU Regulation 2017/745. This comprehensive set of guidelines helps ensure that clinical investigations with medical devices are carried out responsibly and with the well-being of trial subjects as a top priority.

By providing a clear and detailed regulatory framework for clinical investigations, Real Decreto 192/2023 aims to streamline the authorization process, establish effective oversight mechanisms, and promote transparency and accountability in the development and assessment of medical devices. As a result, healthcare professionals, researchers, and manufacturers must familiarize themselves with the new requirements and responsibilities under this decree to ensure compliance and the successful execution of clinical investigations in Spain.

Frequently Asked Questions About Spain’s Real Decreto 192/2023 on Clinical Investigations with Medical Devices

What is the purpose of Real Decreto 192/2023?

Real Decreto 192/2023 aims to implement EU Regulation 2017/745 on medical devices in Spain. The decree provides a robust and harmonized framework for conducting clinical investigations with medical devices, emphasizing ethical standards, methodological approaches, and the protection of trial subjects.

What are the ethical principles and protections for trial subjects in clinical investigations under Real Decreto 192/2023?

The decree requires clinical investigations to adhere to ethical principles, methodological guidelines, and subject protection requirements as outlined in Real Decreto 1090/2015 and the European Union’s Regulation (UE) 2017/745.

What is the role of the Committee of Ethics in Medicines Investigation (CEIm) under the new regulation?

The CEIm provides favorable approval for clinical investigations with medical devices. The research must also have the consent of the center’s management where it will take place. The CEIm will issue opinions on clinical investigations and significant modifications of clinical investigations.

How does Real Decreto 192/2023 define the responsibilities of the Spanish Agency of Medicines and Medical Devices (AEMPS)?

The AEMPS is responsible for evaluating and authorizing clinical investigations and evaluating and resolving any significant modifications to clinical investigations. The AEMPS also informs the relevant autonomous communities of decisions made to ensure the safety of clinical investigations, fostering collaboration and coordination between different authorities.

What are the requirements for providing medical devices for clinical investigations under Real Decreto 192/2023?

The sponsor must provide medical devices intended for clinical investigations free of charge. In specific situations, other forms of supply may be authorized. All leftover products must be returned to the sponsor once the investigation is complete.

What are the documentation and record-keeping requirements under Real Decreto 192/2023?

Sponsors or their legal representatives in Spain must maintain documentation related to the clinical investigation, as specified in Annex XV of Regulation (UE) 2017/745. In the event of bankruptcy or cessation of activity, the AEMPS must be informed to establish appropriate measures for documentation conservation and/or submission.

What are the documentation and record-keeping requirements under Real Decreto 192/2023?

Sponsors or their legal representatives in Spain must maintain documentation related to the clinical investigation, as specified in Annex XV of Regulation (UE) 2017/745. In the event of bankruptcy or cessation of activity, the AEMPS must be informed to establish appropriate measures for documentation conservation and/or submission.

How does Real Decreto 192/2023 address indemnification for damages and authorization procedures?

The decree outlines the procedures for authorization of clinical investigations and indemnification of subjects for potential damages resulting from the investigation. The sponsors is responsible for ensuring that insurance or financial guarantees cover damages and liabilities incurred by the sponsors, principal investigator, collaborators, and the center where the investigation occurs.

What are the indemnification requirements for clinical investigations in Spain under Real Decreto 192/2023?

Real Decreto 192/2023 requires sponsors to provide insurance or an equivalent financial guarantee to cover potential liabilities and damages from clinical investigations. According to Article 33, the minimum guaranteed amount for liability coverage is €250,000 per person participating in the clinical investigation. This amount can be received as a lump sum indemnification or equivalent annuity. The decree also allows for a maximum insured capital or financial guarantee of €2,500,000 per clinical investigation and year. It is essential for sponsors to ensure they have adequate coverage for any potential damages arising from the clinical investigation. For more information, refer to the official Real Decreto 192/2023 document here.

How can healthcare professionals, researchers, and manufacturers ensure compliance with Real Decreto 192/2023?

It is crucial for stakeholders to familiarize themselves with the new requirements and responsibilities under Real Decreto 192/2023 to ensure compliance and the successful execution of clinical investigations. By following the guidelines set forth in the decree, stakeholders can facilitate the development of innovative and reliable medical devices, ultimately improving patient outcomes and overall healthcare quality in Spain.

What are the key differences between the previous regulations and Real Decreto 192/2023?

Real Decreto 192/2023 introduces a more comprehensive and harmonized framework for clinical investigations with medical devices, incorporating provisions from EU Regulation 2017/745. This helps streamline the authorization process, establish effective oversight mechanisms, and promote transparency and accountability in developing and assessing medical devices.

How does Real Decreto 192/2023 impact CE-marked medical devices?

Clinical investigations with CE-marked medical devices outside their intended purpose are subject to specific provisions under Real Decreto 192/2023, which includes reporting to the AEMPS and adherence to the relevant articles of the regulation. This ensures that investigations involving CE-marked products maintain high standards of safety and performance.

What is the timeline for obtaining approval for a clinical investigation under Real Decreto 192/2023?

The timeline for obtaining approval for a clinical investigation depends on the investigation’s complexity and the involved parties’ responsiveness. The CEIm’s favorable approval, the consent of the center’s management where the investigation will take place, and the AEMPS’s evaluation and authorization are required before commencing the investigation.

How can investigators and sponsors stay informed about regulatory changes and updates related to Real Decreto 192/2023?

Investigators and sponsors should regularly consult official sources, such as the AEMPS’s website and the Spanish Official Gazette (BOE), to stay informed about regulatory changes and updates. Additionally, networking with industry professionals, attending relevant conferences, and participating in training programs can help stakeholders stay up-to-date with the latest information.

What penalties or consequences can result from non-compliance with Real Decreto 192/2023?

Non-compliance with Real Decreto 192/2023 can result in penalties or sanctions, including fines, suspension or withdrawal of authorization for the clinical investigation, and potential legal action. The severity of the consequences depends on the nature and extent of the non-compliance, as well as any potential risks posed to trial subjects or the public.

How does Real Decreto 192/2023 impact international clinical investigations conducted in Spain?

International clinical investigations conducted in Spain are subject to the same requirements and responsibilities outlined in Real Decreto 192/2023. Ensuring compliance with the regulation is crucial for the successful execution of international clinical investigations and developing of safe and performance medical devices for the global market.

Impact on Clinical Studies with medical devices in Spain

Spain’s Real Decreto 192/2023 aims to improve the regulatory framework surrounding clinical studies in Spain with medical devices by introducing new provisions that safeguard the safety and performance of these products. By focusing on ethical principles, subject protection, and a streamlined authorization process, the decree helps to promote responsible clinical investigations in Spain.

Healthcare professionals, researchers, and manufacturers must familiarize themselves with the new requirements and responsibilities under Real Decreto 192/2023 to ensure compliance and the successful execution of clinical investigations. This will ultimately contribute to the development of safe and performance medical devices for the benefit of patients and the healthcare system.

As clinical investigations play a crucial role in the development and approval of new medical devices, it is essential that stakeholders work together to adhere to the regulations set forth in Real Decreto 192/2023. By following these guidelines, they can help facilitate the development of innovative and reliable medical devices, improving patient outcomes and overall healthcare quality in Spain.

Written by:
David Tomé

David Tomé

President

Clinical research leader and MedTech entrepreneur with deep expertise in medical devices, IVDs & precision medicine, with global study experience.
Industry Insights & Regulatory Updates

EU Q&A Guide: Amendments to MDR and IVDR Transitional Provisions

In our latest article, MDx offers a comprehensive summary of the European Commission’s Q&A document, focusing on the implementation of Regulation (EU) 2023/607, which amends transitional provisions for specific medical devices and in vitro diagnostic devices under Regulations (EU) 2017/745 and (EU) 2017/746.

The EU Q&A document provides further clarity to the MDR/IVDR amendment, which aims to maintain public health protection, patient safety, prevent medical device shortages, and preserve existing quality and safety standards.

This amending regulation extends the timeline for manufacturers and notified bodies to complete conformity assessments in line with the MDR and removes the ‘sell-off’ date in the MDR and IVDR to prevent unnecessary disposal of safe devices. The document’s responses consider the amendment’s objectives and seek to optimize the extended MDR transitional period.

Part A – Scope of the extension of the MDR transitional period

Which devices can benefit from the extended transitional period?

  • Only ‘legacy devices’ can benefit from the extended transitional period, which includes class I devices under Directive 93/42/EEC (MDD) and devices covered by a valid EC certificate issued in accordance with Directive 90/385/EEC (AIMDD) or the MDD prior to 26 May 2021.

Can devices that have already been certified in accordance with the MDR benefit from extended transitional period?

  • Yes, provided their MDD/AIMDD certificates have not been withdrawn by the notified body. ‘Legacy devices’ and corresponding MDR compliant devices can be placed on the market in parallel until the end of the relevant transitional period.

What about ‘legacy devices’ for which the manufacturer does not wish to apply under the MDR?

  • Manufacturers are not obliged to apply for their ‘legacy devices’ under the MDR. If they do not lodge an application for conformity assessment by 26 May 2024, the transitional period will end on that date.

Which classification rules apply to determine whether the extended transitional period ends on 31 December 2027 or on 31 December 2028?

  • The classification rules laid down in Annex VIII to the MDR apply to determine the end date of the transitional period based on the device’s risk class.

Does the extended transitional period also apply to custom-made devices?

  • A specific transitional period for class III custom-made implantable devices has been introduced by the new Article 120(3f) MDR, allowing them to be placed on the market without the relevant certificate until 26 May 2026, provided certain conditions are met.

If a certificate has expired before 20 March 2023 and a competent authority has granted a derogation in accordance with Article 59 MDR or has applied Article 97 MDR, how long is the transitional period?

  • The device benefits from the full transitional period until 31 December 2027 or 31 December 2028, as applicable, provided the conditions set out in Article 120(3c) MDR are fulfilled. The certificate is deemed to be valid until the end of the applicable transitional period, unless it is withdrawn.

Part B – Evidence of extended transitional period

How can the manufacturer demonstrate that its legacy device benefits from the extension of the transitional period?

  • The EU Q&A document clarifies that the amendments to MDR/IVDR and the extension to the transitional period and the certificate’s validity is automatic by law, provided certain conditions are met. Manufacturers can demonstrate the validity of the certificate to third parties through different means, including:
  • A self-declaration confirming that the conditions for the extension are fulfilled and stating the end date of the transition period, which could be based on a harmonized template.
  • A ‘confirmation letter’ issued by the notified body stating the receipt of the manufacturer’s application for conformity assessment and the conclusion of a written agreement. The confirmation should clearly identify the devices and certificates covered by the extension and could be based on a harmonized template issued without extra costs.
  • Competent authorities can issue certificates of free sale for the duration of the extended certificate validity.
  • The European Commission will update its factsheets to explain the functioning of the extended transition period for competent authorities in non-EU/EEA countries, healthcare professionals, healthcare institutions, and the procurement ecosystem.

Part C – Conditions to be fulfilled to benefit from the extended MDR transition period

What are the necessary elements of a formal application lodged by the manufacturer?

  • The application should include the elements listed in the relevant conformity assessment as referred to in Annexes IX to XI to the MDR, excluding documentation not needed for the conclusion of the written agreement. The application must clearly identify the manufacturer and the devices covered by the application. The manufacturer should provide a timeline for possible submission of the individual technical documentation and any other relevant information.

What are the necessary elements of a written agreement between the manufacturer and the notified body?

  • The written agreement should be based on the formal application lodged by the manufacturer and include a schedule for the submission of relevant documentation, such as the full technical documentation for all devices covered by the application.

What is the meaning of “device intended to substitute that device”?

  • A device intended to substitute the legacy device will usually differ from the legacy device due to significant changes in its design or intended purpose. The manufacturer is responsible for determining the substitute device and explaining the link to the substituted legacy device.

Which evidence does the manufacturer have to provide for having put in place a QMS in accordance with the MDR?

  • Manufacturers must draw up the documentation on its QMS, which needs to be part of the application for conformity assessment

Do manufacturers, which have lodged an application for conformity assessment and have concluded a written agreement with a notified body before 20 March 2023, have to lodge a new application and/or conclude a new written agreement?

  • No. Applications lodged prior to the entry into force of the amending Regulation 2023/607 (i.e., 20 March 2023) remain valid and are sufficient for fulfilling the condition set out in Article 120(3c), point (e) MDR. No new written agreement needs to be signed either.

Part D – Appropriate surveillance to be performed by notified bodies

What are the necessary elements of the arrangement for the transfer of the surveillance from the notified body that issued the MDD/AIMDD certificate to the MDR notified body?

  • The arrangement should follow the same principles outlined in Article 58(1) MDR, including the transfer of relevant documentation and addressing the possibility of the MDR notified body to suspend or withdraw a certificate issued by the MDD/AIMDD notified body, where duly justified.

What does the limitation ‘where practicable’ imply?

  • It takes into account cases where the notified body that issued the relevant certificate under the MDD/AIMDD might be unable to sign the contract, e.g., due to termination of business. A written agreement between the manufacturer and the MDR notified body is still required.

Which notified body is responsible for carrying out the appropriate surveillance when a written agreement in accordance with Article 120(3c), point e, MDR is signed between the manufacturer and a notified body designated under the MDR?

  • The notified body that issued the relevant certificate under the MDD/AIMDD continues to be responsible for the appropriate surveillance until 26 September 2024, after which the notified body that signed the agreement will become responsible for the appropriate surveillance.

In case there is an arrangement for the transfer of the surveillance to a different notified body designated under MDR, what are the implications on the labeling concerning the notified body’s identification number?

  • Legacy devices can continue to be placed on the market and made available without changes to the labeling, including CE marking, indicating the number of the notified body that issued the certificate under the Directive. However, the manufacturer may decide to modify the labeling of legacy devices indicating the number of the notified body to which a formal application under the MDR has been lodged, if practically feasible.

Is the NB, which issued the certificate in accordance with Article 120(3b) of MDR, legally obliged to continue to carry out the surveillance of the products concerned until the end of the new transitional period or until the manufacturer has transferred this surveillance obligation to an MDR NB? May this NB deny the manufacturer the use of its NB number?

  • The previous notified body must continue the surveillance until 26 September 2024 at the latest. Unless otherwise specified in the tripartite agreement, the use of the number of the notified body that issued the certificate must not be denied until the end of the transition period.

Part E – Deletion of the ‘sell-off’ date

Which devices will benefit from the removal of the ‘sell-off’ date?

  • Medical devices that have been placed on the market prior to 26 May 2021 in accordance with the MDD/AIMDD or after 26 May 2021 during the transitional period provided for in Article 120 MDR (i.e. until 31 December 2027 or 31 December 2028, as applicable) will benefit from the removal of the ‘sell-off’ date. They may continue to be made available on the market or put into service without any limitation in time without prejudice to the device’s possible shelf-life or expiry date.
  • Similarly, in vitro diagnostic medical devices that have been placed on the market prior to 26 May 2022 in accordance with the IVDD or after 26 May 2022 during the transitional period provided for in Article 110 IVDR (i.e. until 26 May 2025, 26 May 2026 or 26 May 2027, as applicable) will also benefit from the removal of the ‘sell-off’ date. These IVD devices may continue to be made available on the market or put into service without any limitation in time without prejudice to the device’s possible shelf-life or expiry date.

Please note this article is intended as a summary, to access the full Q&A document, please consult the original source provided by the commission.

How can MDx help?

MDx CRO is a leading quality, regulatory and contract research (CRO) consulting company dedicated to the medical device and diagnostic sectors.

MDx can help medical device & IVD manufacturers navigate the new requirements introduced by the amendment to the MDR and IVDR legislation through Regulation (EU) 2023/607. Our team of experts can provide comprehensive guidance and support to ensure your company’s compliance with the extended transitional period, updated classification rules, and other relevant aspects of the legislation.

We can assist with the following key areas:

  • Determining the eligibility of your devices to benefit from the extended transitional period.
  • Preparing and submitting formal applications for conformity assessment in accordance with the MDR, including the necessary elements for a written agreement with the notified body.
  • Assisting with the transfer of surveillance from the notified body that issued the MDD/AIMDD certificate to the MDR notified body, ensuring a smooth transition and continuous market access for your devices.
  • Helping manufacturers identify substitute devices and ensure compliance with the amended regulations.
  • Providing support for the implementation of a Quality Management System (QMS) in accordance with the MDR, including the preparation of relevant documentation.

Our experienced team at MDx is well-equipped to help you understand and meet the new requirements introduced by this amendment to the MDR and IVDR legislation, ensuring that your medical devices remain compliant and can continue to be placed on the market without disruption.

Contact us today for a consultation with our medical device experts.

Industry Insights & Regulatory Updates

IVDR technical documentation guidance released by Team-NB (updated 2026)

If you are still undecided on which Notified Body (NB) to choose or you are in the early stages of development, Team-NB has just released this best practice guidance Guidance for the Submission of the IVDR Technical Documentation under Annex II and III. This is a must-read for anyone in this position!

By following this unified approach, manufacturers can ensure that their IVD technical documentation meets the regulatory requirements of the IVDR, regardless of which NB they eventually choose.

However, if you have already selected a NB, it is important to remember that each NB will have their own specific guidance and nuances that need to be taken into account when preparing your IVDR technical documentation. Nonetheless, this guidance document is a great starting point and can help ensure that your technical documentation is of a high standard, regardless of which NB you choose.

Medical devices have to meet strict regulatory requirements to ensure their safety and performance. In Vitro Diagnostic (IVD) medical devices are no exception, and their manufacturers must demonstrate conformity to General Safety and Performance Requirements (GSPR) through technical documentation.

To ensure a unified approach to IVDR technical documentation submissions, Team NB members reviewed best practice guidance documents submitted by individual notified body members. The result is a comprehensive guidance document aligned with the In Vitro Diagnostic Medical Devices Regulation (EU) 2017/746.

IVDR Technical Documentation Submission

Manufacturers of all classes of IVD medical devices must prepare technical documentation that demonstrates conformity to GSPRs according to the EU IVDR 2017/746. The technical documentation must reflect the current status of the IVD medical device through application of the manufacturer’s Quality Management System (QMS). It must be prepared in a language acceptable to the reviewing organization, whether it be a notified body or regulatory authority.

The IVDR technical documentation reflects the status of the IVD medical device at a particular moment in time, such as the moment of premarket submission or when requested for post-market purposes.

MDx CRO can help you prepare high-quality IVDR technical documentation that meets the expectations of Notified Bodies and ensures compliance with the IVDR

Highlights of Team-NB guidance

Team-NB is an organization dedicated to promoting transparency and harmonization among notified bodies in Europe, which is a fundamental aspect for the development and certification of medical devices. You can see in their member page which Notified Bodies are part of Team-NB. The largest Notified Bodies are all represented.
The group supports the implementation of new regulations and provide guidance documents to ensure all members are meeting the same high standards of quality and compliance – essentially ensuring there is a level playing field when it comes to Notified Body expectations for compliance.

Key points to consider in your submission

Incomplete submissions and lack of cohesive structure of the IVRD technical documentation are the most common reasons for delays in technical documentation reviews by notified bodies. To avoid delays and improve submissions, manufacturers should consider the following practical points:

  • Communication with the notified body before an application is lodged: Manufacturers should clarify the language requirements, documentation labelling requirements, and submission methods with their notified body. General administrative information about the manufacturer should be provided in the technical documentation, including legal manufacturer name and address, EU Authorized Representative, and subcontractors’ location, EMDN coding, NANDO coding, and whether the device is made available to the market through distance sales.
  • IVDR Technical documentation submission: The technical documentation must be presented in a clear, organized, readily searchable, and unambiguous manner. It must include regulatory references to the applicable regulatory requirements of the EU IVDR.
  • The most recently updated comprehensive reports (including clinical performance studies) and data should be included. Abbreviated or partial test reports are not considered acceptable. Verification reports should be complete.
  • The technical documentation must document how the manufacturer ensures compliance with every applicable GSPR. Information duplication for multiple documents, such as device description, should be correct throughout all areas where this information is duplicated.
  • The data in the technical documentation must be consistent with the data provided in the respective application forms. Valid justifications should always be provided or accompanied where there are deficiencies in the requested data.
  • As part of the technical documentation referred to in Annex II, the manufacturer shall keep up to date a list of all Unique Device Identifiers (UDIs) assigned.

If you’re still undecided on which Notified Body to choose or you’re in the early stages of development, this best practice guidance by Team-NB is a must-read!

Conclusion

IVDR Technical documentation submissions must demonstrate conformity to GSPR through clear and concise documentation of development, design, and manufacturing processes. Manufacturers should communicate with their notified body before submitting their technical documentation. This way they ensure that it is presented in a clear, organized, readily searchable, and unambiguous manner.

They should provide comprehensive reports and data, document compliance with every applicable GSPR. Moreover they must ensure data consistency throughout the technical documentation. By following these best practice guidance, manufacturers can streamline the IVDR technical documentation review process and expedite their IVD medical device’s regulatory approval. Is important to guarantee that their technical documentation meets the regulatory requirements of the IVDR, regardless of which NB they eventually choose.

If a manufacturer has already selected a Notified Body, it is important to remember that each NB will have their own specific guidance and nuances. Those need to be taken into account when preparing technical documentation. Nonetheless, this guidance document is a great starting point and can help manufacturers ensure that their technical documentation is of a high standard. Regardless of which NB they choose.

How can MDx CRO help with your IVDR Technical Documentation?

We are an IVD Contract Research Organization (CRO) that can help IVD device manufacturers with the preparation of a complete set of the IVDR technical documentation including:

  • Risk Management documentation
  • Design & Manufacturing documentation
  • Device Description and Intended Purpose reviews
  • Labelling and information supplied with the device
  • General Safety & Performance Requirements (GSPR) checklists
  • Clinical Evidence: Performance Evaluation Plan (PEP), Scientific Validity Report (SVR), Analytical Performance Report (APR), Clinical Performance Report (CPR), Performance Evaluation Report (PER),
  • Post Market Surveillance (PMS) documentation, including PMPF, PMS reports and Periodic Safety Update Reports (PSURs)
  • Summary of Safety and Performance (SSP) for classes C and D IVDs
  • UDI
  • Declaration of Conformity (DoC)
  • and more…

Out team of experts, has extensive experience in preparing scientific validity reports for EU IVDR submission. Our experience with IVDR technical documentation, allow us to meet Notified Body expectations. Our experts work closely with its clients to ensure that their technical documents for IVDs are designed and written in compliance with applicable regulations and guidelines.

Start preparing IVDR compliant, high-quality technical documentation that meets Notified Body expectations!

FAQ

What is Team-NB and why is its guidance important?

Team-NB is an association of European Notified Bodies that promotes harmonisation and transparency. Its guidance on IVDR technical documentation provides a unified best-practice approach, helping manufacturers prepare submissions that meet consistent expectations across different Notified Bodies.

Does this guidance replace individual Notified Body requirements?

No. The document is a strong starting point, especially if you have not yet selected a Notified Body. However, once a NB is chosen, you must follow its specific procedures, formats, and nuances in addition to the general Team-NB recommendations.

What are the most common reasons IVDR submissions are delayed?

The main causes are incomplete documentation, inconsistent data across sections, missing or abbreviated test reports, poor structure, and lack of clear linkage to General Safety and Performance Requirements (GSPR). Submissions that are not searchable, organised, and fully cross-referenced often trigger additional review cycles.

What must IVDR technical documentation demonstrate?

Under In Vitro Diagnostic Regulation, manufacturers must demonstrate conformity with all applicable GSPRs through structured, up-to-date documentation covering design, manufacturing, risk management, clinical evidence, labelling, UDI, and post-market activities.

Is early communication with a Notified Body necessary?

Yes. Clarifying language requirements, submission format, labelling expectations, and administrative details before lodging an application can prevent avoidable delays and reduce back-and-forth during review.

Written by:
Carlos Galamba

Carlos Galamba

CEO

Senior regulatory leader and former BSI IVDR reviewer with deep experience in CE marking high-risk IVDs, companion diagnostics, and IVDR implementation.
Industry Insights & Regulatory Updates

Position Paper on Cyber Security: What EU Notified Bodies Expect from Medical Device Manufacturers

Connected medical technologies—from implantables and bedside devices to SaMD mobile apps and cloud platforms—are transforming patient care. That same connectivity introduces new attack surfaces that can jeopardize safety, performance, data integrity, and privacy if not addressed systematically. The European Association of Notified Bodies (Team-NB) issued a consensus position paper on cybersecurity to clarify expectations for manufacturers and help convergence across the EU market. The paper underscores that cybersecurity is integral to compliance under the MDR/IVDR and should be engineered across the device lifecycle, not appended at the end.

Team-NB’s position aligns with the MDCG 2019-16 Rev.1 Guidance on Cybersecurity for Medical Devices, which frames security as a prerequisite for safety and as part of risk management and software lifecycle processes (e.g., secure design, verification/validation, vulnerability handling, and post-market monitoring). Manufacturers are expected to demonstrate “state-of-the-art” controls proportionate to the device’s intended purpose, clinical context, and connectivity profile.

Why this matters now is clear in the data. The ENISA Health Threat Landscape reports that healthcare has faced a sustained wave of cyber incidents, with ransomware representing 54% of observed threats during the January 2021–March 2023 period. Attackers increasingly target hospitals and providers, but connected devices and digital diagnostics sit within the same ecosystem and must be designed to operate safely under adversarial conditions. Building to recognized frameworks—and proving it in technical documentation and post-market processes—has become a market access requirement, not just good practice.

What Team-NB emphasizes for manufacturers

Team-NB calls for coherent, harmonised expectations to avoid fragmentation from diverging national rules and guidance. Practically, that means embedding security by design within the established regulatory toolset: risk management tied to clinical harm, secure software lifecycle practices, configuration management, SBOM and patching strategies, coordinated vulnerability disclosure, and field monitoring that feeds back into PMS/PMCF. Notified Bodies will evaluate whether these controls are commensurate with the device’s risk, evidence is traceable, and responsibilities across manufacturers and health-care organisations are clearly defined.

The paper also recognises resource constraints across industry and authorities and encourages approaches that streamline conformity assessment without lowering the bar—for example, leveraging existing international standards and clearly mapping them to EU requirements. In parallel, broader policy work and sector threat intelligence (e.g., ENISA’s updates) should inform manufacturers’ threat models and maintenance plans over the full device lifetime.

How MDx CRO can help

Cybersecurity is now inseparable from regulatory success. MDx CRO integrates security expectations into regulatory strategy, clinical and post-market plans, and technical documentation so your submission is consistent end-to-end. We align your files with MDCG 2019-16 Rev.1 and Team-NB’s position, operationalise secure-by-design practices in your development lifecycle, and set up vulnerability monitoring and response that fit your PMS system. Explore our support for Regulatory Affairs and Clinical Research, or contact us to discuss a cybersecurity-ready roadmap for your device portfolio.

Industry Insights & Regulatory Updates

Data produced by ‘Off-Label’ Device Use in accordance with EU Medical Device Regulation 2017/745

A new position paper from the Mirror-MDCG Clinical Working Group, composed of representatives from 11 Notified Bodies and approved by Team-NB, clarifies how data from off-label medical device use should be viewed and handled under the EU Medical Device Regulation (MDR) 2017/745. Distributed through the CIRCABC platform, the paper aims to harmonize understanding across Notified Bodies and manufacturers when such data emerge during clinical evaluation or post-market surveillance.

Understanding “Off-Label” Use Under MDR

The term off-label use is not explicitly defined in the MDR. However, Annex XIV, Part B—which outlines requirements for Post-Market Clinical Follow-Up (PMCF)—expects manufacturers to identify misuse or off-label use of their devices proactively as part of their ongoing data collection and analysis.
This is because off-label use, intentional or unintentional, can influence a device’s safety, performance, and benefit–risk profile.

Unlike the pharmaceutical sector—where “off-label use” is well established and tied to product labeling and authorized indications—the concept for medical devices remains less formally defined. In practice, off-label use refers broadly to a device being used outside its intended purpose as described in the manufacturer’s instructions for use (IFU) or technical documentation.

Why It Matters: Data Relevance and Clinical Evidence

The Team-NB position paper emphasizes that data generated from off-label use can sometimes offer valuable safety and performance insights—but such data cannot be directly used to support the intended purpose of a device unless carefully analyzed and justified.
Manufacturers should therefore:

  • Identify and record instances of off-label use through PMCF and Post-Market Surveillance (PMS) systems.
  • Assess relevance and scientific validity of such data when considering it in the clinical evaluation or trend reporting.
  • Differentiate between misuse due to human factors and genuine clinical necessity or innovation.

Any insights drawn from off-label data must be clearly documented, and the rationale for inclusion or exclusion in the device’s clinical evaluation report (CER) should be justified according to MDR Annex XIV, Part A.

Implications for Manufacturers and Notified Bodies

For manufacturers, this position paper serves as a reminder that off-label use is both a risk management consideration and a potential data source. It requires active monitoring, not passive recording.
Notified Bodies, for their part, are expected to evaluate how manufacturers:

  • Capture and categorize off-label usage events.
  • Integrate off-label findings into PMCF and PMS activities.
  • Apply conclusions from such data to risk–benefit assessments and updates to labeling or IFUs.

When recurring off-label use indicates a systematic clinical need not covered by the original intended purpose, manufacturers may need to initiate a design or labeling review and consider regulatory reassessment.

Moving Toward Harmonized Practice

By formalizing its view, Team-NB and the participating Mirror-MDCG Clinical Working Group aim to improve consistency and transparency across Notified Bodies when reviewing PMCF and CER documentation that includes off-label data.
This harmonization will help reduce uncertainty for manufacturers and contribute to more robust post-market evidence across the EU.

How MDx CRO Supports Manufacturers

MDx CRO assists manufacturers in integrating off-label monitoring into PMCF and PMS plans, ensuring that data handling and reporting align with MDR expectations.
Our team supports clinical evaluation, PMCF study design, and Notified Body submission strategy, helping you interpret real-world data responsibly—whether it originates from intended or off-label use.

Learn more about our Regulatory Affairs Services and Clinical Research Solutions, or contact us to discuss compliance strategies for MDR Annex XIV requirements.

Industry Insights & Regulatory Updates