Skip to content
Entourage

When does a medical device change need the notified body or the FDA?

We assess changes to medical devices and IVD: notified body approval under MDR or IVDR, new 510(k) or letter to file in the US. What a change costs is settled when it is classified as significant or not, before anyone implements it.

Overview

Why does a device change turn into a certification problem?

Change assessment for medical devices and IVD · MDR and IVDR Annexes VII, IX and X · 21 CFR 807.81(a)(3) and 21 CFR 814.39 · FDA guidance on device and software changes

Last updated: October 28, 2026

Most changes to a certified device can be made without a new conformity assessment. The cost comes from the changes that were classified late, one at a time, or against the wrong criteria.

  • The change is implemented before the notified body has decided. Where an EU technical documentation assessment certificate exists, MDR Annex IX Section 4.10 requires the approval of the issuing notified body for changes that could affect safety and performance or the conditions prescribed for use.
  • Small changes are assessed one by one. The FDA guidance compares each modified device with the device in its most recent clearance, so the cumulative effect of individual changes can cross the threshold for a new 510(k).
  • The notification procedure agreed with the notified body is not known in the team. MDR Annex VII Section 4.9 requires documented procedures and contractual arrangements under which manufacturers submit plans for changes to the approved quality management system, design or type for prior approval, with measures for checking the significance of the changes.
  • The legacy logic is applied to an MDR or IVDR certificate. MDCG 2020-3 Rev. 1 and MDCG 2022-6 were written for devices under the transitional provisions of Art. 120 MDR and Art. 110 IVDR; for a device certified under the regulations, the criteria of the annexes apply.

Industries

What this means in your industry

Select an industry

Medical Devices

What applies
MDR Annex IX Section 4.10 where a technical documentation assessment certificate exists, Annex X Section 5 for type examination, Annex IX Section 2.4 for the QMS; in the US 21 CFR 807.81(a)(3) and 21 CFR 814.39.
Who audits
The notified body that issued the certificate, under the procedure agreed with it (MDR Annex VII Section 4.9); in the US the FDA, in the review of a submission or in an inspection.

IVD

What applies
IVDR Annex IX Section 4.11 where a technical documentation assessment certificate exists, Annex X Section 5 and Annex IX Section 2.4; the FDA guidance on device changes has its own flowchart for in vitro diagnostic devices.
Who audits
The notified body that issued the IVDR certificate, under IVDR Annex VII Section 4.9.

Services

How we support you

Change assessment per change

Classifying each planned change against the criteria that apply to the device: MDR or IVDR Annex IX or Annex X for certified devices, 21 CFR 807.81(a)(3) and the FDA flowcharts for cleared devices, with the rationale written down. Deliverable: a signed assessment per change that states its regulatory consequence.

Change notification to the notified body

Preparing the notification of a planned change: what changes, which parts of the technical documentation are affected, the verification and validation evidence and the proposed classification. Deliverable: a notification package in the form the notified body's procedure asks for.

Regulatory screening in the change procedure

A step in the change procedure that sends every change to the regulatory assessment before release, with criteria, responsibilities and the link to the notification procedure agreed with the notified body. Deliverable: SOP section and assessment form.

One change, two markets

Assessing a change once for the EU and the US. The criteria are worded differently, so the same change can need the notified body's approval in one market and a documented assessment in the other. Deliverable: a joint assessment with one outcome per market.

What it comes down to

A change to a certified device ends in one of three places: an internal change with a documented rationale, a change the notified body has to approve before release, or a change that reopens the conformity assessment. Which one applies depends on the certificate and on the market.

Under the MDR, the test depends on the conformity assessment route. Annex IX Section 4.10 covers devices with an EU technical documentation assessment certificate, which on the Annex IX route means class III and the class IIb implantable devices under the second subparagraph of Art. 52(4): changes that could affect safety and performance or the conditions prescribed for use need approval, and the notified body decides between a supplement and a new conformity assessment.

For class IIa and the other class IIb devices, Art. 52(4) and (6) provide for an assessment of the technical documentation of representative devices. Their changes go through the notified body's change procedure under Annex VII Section 4.9. Type-examined devices have their own test in Annex X Section 5.2: changes that may affect conformity with the general safety and performance requirements or with the conditions prescribed for use.

The IVDR uses the same wording in Annex IX Section 4.11 and adds a consultation of the EU reference laboratory where a change could affect compliance with the common specifications; type examination follows Annex X Section 5. In both regulations, Annex IX Section 2.4 covers plans for substantial changes to the quality management system or the device range, and the notified body decides whether they need additional audits.

In the US, the threshold is 21 CFR 807.81(a)(3): a new 510(k) when a change could significantly affect safety or effectiveness, or when the intended use changes in a major way. Two FDA guidance documents, one for software, work through it with flowcharts. For PMA devices, 21 CFR 814.39 governs supplements.

EU, technical documentation assessment certificateUS, 510(k) or De Novo deviceUS, PMA device
Testcould affect safety and performance or the conditions prescribed for usecould significantly affect safety or effectiveness, or a major change in intended useaffects safety or effectiveness
Who decidesthe notified body that issued the certificatethe manufacturer, documented; the FDA if a new 510(k) is filedthe PMA holder first; the FDA on a supplement or a 30-day notice
Outcomesupplement to the certificate or new conformity assessmentdocumented assessment or new 510(k)PMA supplement, 30-day notice or periodic report

One route is planned in advance: a change consistent with a cleared predetermined change control plan (PCCP) under section 515C of the FD&C Act needs no new 510(k) (21 CFR 807.81(b)(1)(ii)).

Two neighboring topics sit outside this page: the QMS change process under ISO 13485:2016 Section 7.3.9, and the significant-change test for legacy devices during the MDR and IVDR transition.

Our approach

Our approach

01

Describe the change

A change description that names the affected design outputs, labeling, software and processes, compared with the certified or cleared state.

02

Classify

An outcome per market with its rationale: internal with documentation, notification to the notified body, new conformity assessment, new 510(k) or PMA supplement.

03

Notify or file

A notification package or submission that matches the notified body's procedure or the FDA route.

04

Release

Release only after the notified body's decision or the FDA's clearance where one is needed, and a file that shows the order.

Common pitfalls

Where projects commonly fail

The assessment is a ticked flowchart.

Appendix B of the FDA guidance states that highlighting the flowcharts or answering yes or no without further justification is not sufficient documentation.

Labeling and instructions for use are treated as editorial.

The FDA guidance gives labeling changes their own flowchart, and where MDR Annex IX Section 4.10 applies, a change that could affect the conditions prescribed for use needs the notified body's approval.

Software updates go out as maintenance releases without an assessment.

The FDA publishes a separate guidance for software changes to 510(k) devices, and under the MDR the question for software is the same as for hardware.

An extension of the intended purpose is handled like a design change.

Under MDR Annex X Section 5.3, changes to the intended purpose and conditions of use of a type-examined device, except limitations, need a new application for conformity assessment.

The assessment is not revisited.

The FDA guidance asks manufacturers to re-evaluate a change when the assumptions behind the first assessment do not hold, and to document the update.

Regulatory Affairs

Do any of these pitfalls apply to you?

In a first call we assess your situation and say what needs clarifying first in your case. Without obligation, reply usually within one working day.

FAQ

Frequently asked questions

The MDR uses the term in Art. 120(3c)(b) for legacy devices: they may stay on the market only if there are no significant changes in design and intended purpose, and MDCG 2020-3 Rev. 1 explains how that is assessed. For devices certified under the MDR, the test depends on the conformity assessment route: Annex IX Section 4.10 for devices with an EU technical documentation assessment certificate, Annex X Section 5.2 for type-examined devices, and in every case the notified body's change procedure under Annex VII Section 4.9, which includes measures for checking the significance of changes.

Sources
  • Regulation (EU) 2017/745 (MDR), consolidated version CELEX 02017R0745-20260719: Art. 52, Art. 120(3c), Annex VII Section 4.9, Annex IX Sections 2.4 and 4.10, Annex X Section 5
  • Regulation (EU) 2017/746 (IVDR), consolidated version CELEX 02017R0746-20250110: Art. 110(3c), Annex VII Section 4.9, Annex IX Sections 2.4 and 4.11, Annex X Section 5
  • MDCG 2020-3 Rev. 1, Guidance on significant changes regarding the transitional provision under Article 120 of the MDR with regard to devices covered by certificates according to MDD or AIMDD: https://health.ec.europa.eu/document/download/800e8e87-d4eb-4cc5-b5ad-07a9146d7c90_en?filename=mdcg_2020-3_en_1.pdf
  • MDCG 2022-6, Guidance on significant changes regarding the transitional provision under Article 110(3) of the IVDR: https://health.ec.europa.eu/document/download/14c2d8dd-8489-4db5-b035-1c174f17fb54_en?filename=mdcg_2022-6.pdf
  • FDA Guidance: Deciding When to Submit a 510(k) for a Change to an Existing Device: https://www.fda.gov/regulatory-information/search-fda-guidance-documents/deciding-when-submit-510k-change-existing-device
  • FDA Guidance: Deciding When to Submit a 510(k) for a Software Change to an Existing Device: https://www.fda.gov/regulatory-information/search-fda-guidance-documents/deciding-when-submit-510k-software-change-existing-device
  • 21 CFR 807.81 and 21 CFR 814.39 (eCFR); FD&C Act, section 515C
  • ISO 13485:2016, Section 7.3.9

Image notice: The images on this page were generated using artificial intelligence. They do not depict real people, places, or events.

Regulations & standards considered

  • EU 2017/745 (MDR), Annex IX Section 2.4 (substantial changes to the approved quality management system or the device range) and Section 4.10 (changes to the approved device)
  • EU 2017/745 (MDR), Annex X Section 5 (changes to the approved type)
  • EU 2017/745 (MDR), Annex VII Section 4.9 (notified body procedures for changes and modifications)
  • EU 2017/745 (MDR), Art. 52, in particular paragraphs 4 and 6 (assessment of the technical documentation for class IIb and class IIa devices)
  • EU 2017/746 (IVDR), Annex IX Sections 2.4 and 4.11, Annex X Section 5, Annex VII Section 4.9, Art. 48
  • EU 2017/745 (MDR), Art. 120(3c)(b), and EU 2017/746 (IVDR), Art. 110(3c)(b) (legacy devices: no significant changes in design and intended purpose)
  • MDCG 2020-3 Rev. 1 (significant changes, legacy devices under Art. 120 MDR)
  • MDCG 2022-6 (significant changes, legacy devices under Art. 110(3) IVDR)
  • 21 CFR 807.81(a)(3) (changes that require a new 510(k)) and 21 CFR 807.81(b)(1)(ii) (changes consistent with a cleared PCCP)
  • FDA Guidance: Deciding When to Submit a 510(k) for a Change to an Existing Device
  • FDA Guidance: Deciding When to Submit a 510(k) for a Software Change to an Existing Device
  • 21 CFR 814.39 (PMA supplements)
  • FD&C Act, section 515C (predetermined change control plans)
  • ISO 13485:2016, Section 7.3.9 (control of design and development changes)

Have a concrete project?

Briefly outline your situation. We'll respond with an initial assessment, usually within one business day.

Prefer direct? +41 61 271 23 80
info@theentourage.ch

  • Reply usually within one working day
  • 4 locations: DE · CH · IT · US
  • 100% life sciences