July 24, 2014

FDA Issues Draft Guidance on Medical Device Reporting for Manufacturers

The FDA recently issued a lengthy draft guidance titled “Medical Device Reporting for Manufacturers.” Similar to the related regulations, found at 21 C.F.R. § 803, the draft guidance discusses the requirements for reporting adverse events related to medical devices in a question and answer format. The draft guidance even converts the definitions of 21 C.F.R. § 803.3, which are crucial to understanding the reporting obligations, into a question and answer format. Thus, much of the draft guidance will be familiar to those who deal with the existing regulations on a regular basis.

For example, the draft guidance identifies the following basic requirements of manufacturers with respect to device reporting:

  • To submit to FDA reports of MDR reportable events involving their medical devices

  • To develop, maintain, and implement written procedures for the identification and evaluation of all adverse medical device events to determine whether the event is an MDR reportable event; and,

  • To establish and maintain complete files for all complaints concerning adverse medical device events.

In this connection, the draft guidance summarizes the definition of a reportable event as an event that “manufacturers become aware of that reasonably suggests that one of their marketed devices may have caused or contributed to a death or serious injury, or has malfunctioned and the malfunction of the device or a similar device that they market would be likely to cause or contribute to a death or serious injury if the malfunction were to recur.”

The second half of the draft guidance, which addresses what to do in specific situations and specific questions about completing FDA Form 3500A in connection with a report, is likely to be of more interest to those already familiar with the regulations. Some of the issues addressed in this part of the draft guidance include: 

  • Whether a delay in surgery related to a device is a reportable event

  • How to determine the expected life of a device

  • Whether events already mentioned in the labeling are reportable

  • Whether an event indirectly caused by a failed diagnostic device is reportable

  • Whether an event is reportable when there is a conflict in medical opinion as to whether the device contributed to the event

  • How to report adverse events involving the same patient and device but occurring on different days

  • The amount of effort required for a follow-up investigation

  • Whether an event is reportable if the device is being used under an IDE

  • The reportability of events occurring outside the U.S.

  • Whether a manufacturer has an obligation to submit a report when it has ceased marketing the device

  • Whether a manufacturer must investigate and submit a report on an event it becomes aware of through literature

A copy of the draft guidance can be found here.


About the Author

Hae Park-Suk, Barnes Thornburg Law firm, Patent Attorney
Of Counsel

Hae Park-Suk is of counsel in the Washington, D.C., office and a member of the Intellectual Property Department. Ms. Park-Suk counsels clients on the selection, adoption, availability, and proper use of trademarks. Her practice consists of searching and clearing trademarks, prosecuting domestic and international trademark applications, managing extensive foreign trademark portfolios, assisting clients in planning and structuring their worldwide trademark strategies, assisting clients in protecting and enforcing their trademarks in the U.S. and worldwide, coordinating intellectual property...


About the Author

Lynn C. Tyler, M.S, Barnes Thornburg Law Firm, Patent Attorney

Lynn C. Tyler is a partner and registered patent lawyer in the firm’s Intellectual Property Department. Mr. Tyler helps innovative companies secure and preserve their market position and competitive advantage by navigating their way through the FDA to the marketplace and enforcing their intellectual property rights, which often must be protected against imitators who seek to reap where they have not sown. He litigates intellectual property matters and represents clients at virtually all stages of the process, including pre-litigation counseling, alternative dispute resolution, formal...


Boost: AJAX core statistics

Legal Disclaimer

You are responsible for reading, understanding and agreeing to the National Law Review's (NLR’s) and the National Law Forum LLC's  Terms of Use and Privacy Policy before using the National Law Review website. The National Law Review is a free to use, no-log in database of legal and business articles. The content and links on are intended for general information purposes only. Any legal analysis, legislative updates or other content and links should not be construed as legal or professional advice or a substitute for such advice. No attorney-client or confidential relationship is formed by the transmission of information between you and the National Law Review website or any of the law firms, attorneys or other professionals or organizations who include content on the National Law Review website. If you require legal or professional advice, kindly contact an attorney or other suitable professional advisor.  

Some states have laws and ethical rules regarding solicitation and advertisement practices by attorneys and/or other professionals. The National Law Review is not a law firm nor is  intended to be  a referral service for attorneys and/or other professionals. The NLR does not wish, nor does it intend, to solicit the business of anyone or to refer anyone to an attorney or other professional.  NLR does not answer legal questions nor will we refer you to an attorney or other professional if you request such information from us. 

Under certain state laws the following statements may be required on this website and we have included them in order to be in full compliance with these rules. The choice of a lawyer or other professional is an important decision and should not be based solely upon advertisements. Attorney Advertising Notice: Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Statement in compliance with Texas Rules of Professional Conduct. Unless otherwise noted, attorneys are not certified by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, nor can NLR attest to the accuracy of any notation of Legal Specialization or other Professional Credentials.

The National Law Review - National Law Forum LLC 4700 Gilbert Ave. Suite 47 #230 Western Springs, IL 60558  Telephone  (708) 357-3317 If you would ike to contact us via email please click here.