The EU notified body industry association, TEAM-NB, and the European Confederation of Notified Bodies Group (NB-Med), have drafted a position paper in a bid to clarify how to apply the EU MDR's regulatory provisions on spinal implants. The document features a risk-based decision tree to demonstrate whether spinal implants – both fusion and non-fusion devices – should be in risk class IIb or III. This will determine the amount of work that needs to be done.
Their joint work was prompted by the complex wording used in Classification Rule 8 of the MDR (contained in Annex VIII, 5.4), on implantable devices and long-term surgically-invasive devices. The two groups felt that this impeded a harmonized interpretation of the regulation, and moreover that it lacked clarity regarding the level of scrutiny that notified bodies would need to apply when overseeing the manufacturers of such devices.
This states that all implantable devices and long-term surgically-invasive devices are in class IIb unless they:
are total or partial joint replacements, in which case they are in class III, with the exception of ancillary components, such as screws, wedges, plates and instruments; or
are spinal disc replacement implants and implantable devices that come into contact with the spinal column, in which case they are in class III, with the exception of components such as screws, wedges, plates and instruments.
There are many complexities around this, however, as are listed in the Position Paper.
The two organizations say that “with this position paper, notified bodies are providing their view and interpretation to the various EU regulators, including the European Commmision, enabling them to comment and correct if deemed necessary.”
The authors of the position paper believe that the decision tree will reduce the number of unnecessary submissions for clinical evaluation consultation, a regulatory process involving a close scrutiny reserved for the highest-risk devices.
This, they say, is in line with the intended focus of the planned expert panels – on novel devices and devices with possible major clinical or health impacts.
“With this measure,” the authors add, "a smaller number of experts at the panel are needed, reducing the burden on the EU Commission to establish such an expert panel within a short period of time.”
They offer the following decision-tree on spinal implant classification:
|
Risk class |
|
Type of technology |
Degree of review |
|
IIb |
Fusion devices |
|
|
|
a) |
Well-established technologies
|
To be sampled according to typical rules for class IIb devices (at least one representative technical documentation per generic device group) |
|
|
b) |
Not so well-established technologies: |
Full review of technical documentation, similar to class III devices (100% sampling) |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
III |
Non-fusion devices(eg dynamic fixation) |
Subject to a clinical evaluation consultation procedure, including review by an expert panel as part of the scrutiny procedure |
|
製品説明＆デモお申込
専任スタッフによるデモンストレーションを兼ねたサービスの詳しいご説明、または無料トライアルを常時受け付けています。ご希望の場合は下記のフォームよりお気軽にお申し込みください。
＊一部のサービスでは無料トライアルをご利用になれません。
お問い合わせ先
ご質問等ございましたらお気軽にご連絡下さい。
日本（平日：9時～18時）
電話：+81 (0)3 6273 4260
Email：inquiry.jp@informa.com
レポートストア
オンラインショップのレポートストアでは、医療用医薬品の市場調査・分析レポートを常時1000本以上販売しています。レポート1本単位で購入でき、オンラインでご提供いたします。
お探しの情報が見つからない場合はお問い合わせ先までお気軽にご連絡ください。
