7 Common 510(k) Mistakes and How to Avoid Them
Global Medical Device Podcast powered by Greenlight Guru
Design Control Best Practices for Medical Device Product Risk Management
ISO 14971 is the current industry standard for medical device product risk management. "Design control best practices in and of themselves are a risk management approach," he says.
The 510(k) is the workhorse of regulatory submissions to the FDA from the medical device industry in the United States. However, 510(k)s continue to be the source of problems, delays, and rejections. It only takes common sense and simple solutions to overcome these issues.
In this episode of the Global Medical Device Podcast, Jon Speer talks to Mike Drues of Vascular Sciences about common 510(k) mistakes and how to avoid them. They also cover what has changed (if anything) in the past five years since Jon wrote the article, 7 Common Mistakes That Sink FDA 510(k) Clearance.
Some of the highlights of this episode include:
- Mistake #1 - Inconsistency with Documentation: The intended use statement often is inconsistently put into other sections of the 510(k). It’s important to understand the difference between indications for and intended use.
- Mistake #2 - Not Using Checklist: The FDA’s 510(k) submission guidance provides a Refuse to Accept (RTA) checklist. Help yourself and reviewers out. The FDA states what it is going to do and what it wants, so there should be no surprises.
- Mistake #3 - Not Providing All Expected Testing: The FDA rarely accepts promissory commitments to do sterilization, validation, or biocompatibility testing later. Also, you should include protocols, results, and reports to verify rigorousness of testing.
- Mistake #4 - Not Doing Real-time Shelf-life Studies: FDA wants evidence to back up claims of stated shelf life and wants a correlation between real-time and accelerated aging data. Shelf life is what happens to your product in the future.
- Mistake #5 - Underestimating Risk Management Requirements: Show list of requirements and provide the paper trail for your traceability. The FDA needs to conclude that your product is safe and substantially equivalent to a predicate.
- Mistake #6 - Not Demonstrating Equivalence with Predicates: You need to depict your device as novel and unique, but not so different that the FDA thinks your predicate is not a good example.
- Mistake #7 - Formatting Submission Incorrectly: Include page numbers and an eCopy. Also, the size of the file matters and needs to be named according to conventions.
Memorable quotes from this episode:
“The intended use statement is a pretty important premise for any 510(k) submission because for all intents and purposes, that statement helps regulators and helps you determine how your product is ultimately going to be classified.” Jon Speer
“One of the most common reasons why they are rejected is because the high-level labeling when it is repeated is not repeated exactly the same way.” Mike Drues
“Intended use focuses on the device. Whereas, indications for use focuses on the patient.” Mike Drues
“The RTA checklist was intended to be a tool for the FDA reviewer, when submission received, for them to go through and make sure all the constituent parts and components and what is expected to be in that submission is included.” Jon Speer
“FDA reviewers see probably dozens, maybe hundreds of submissions in a finite period of time. Some are better than others. Well, make yours standout. Make yours easier to read.” Jon Speer
Links:
7 Common Mistakes That Sink FDA 510(k) Clearance
FDA - 510(k) Submission Process
7 FDA Pathways to Bring Your Medical Device to Market
Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH)
The AI-powered Podcast Player
