European Union: Navigating product classification under the Medical Device Regulation and the In Vitro Diagnostic Medical Device Regulation? New manual on borderline and classification issued

In brief

In September 2022, the Borderline and Classification Working Group (BCWG), a subgroup of the Medical Device Coordination Group (MDCG), issued a manual to determine whether a particular product qualifies as a medical device or in vitro diagnostic and into which class a particular medical device or in vitro diagnostic falls. The MDCG is operating under the Medical Device Regulation (MDR) and the In Vitro Diagnostic Medical Device Regulation (IVDR).


Contents

In more detail

The manual is a non-binding guideline and aims to prevent different product classifications across Member States. A similar manual had been issued previously under the Medical Devices Directives1 but needed revision in light of the new definitions, classification rules and operation of the MDCG under the MDR and IVDR.

The new manual is dynamic and will continue to be updated with the outcomes of Member States' consultations for specific products and categories of products. It needs to be read in conjunction with other guidance issued by the MDCG on borderline products and classification.2

Despite the drive for harmonization with the EU, there are still today products with different statuses across Member States or even within one Member State (e.g., macrogol-based laxatives3). 

For those products that have previously been classified as medical devices under Directive 93/42/EEC, there is a likely need to re-certify under the MDR. In such cases, a notified body may call into question the status of the product as a medical device and seek the opinion of the national competent authority. Such national competent authority in turn may consult with other Member States in the BCWG. If the national competent authority decides to assign the product to another product category (say medicines), the consequences are significant: not only are the approval pathways and the required evidence very different but also the marketing, supply, post-market surveillance, etc., will all be governed by very different rules. Of particular relevance are any pricing and reimbursement implications as pricing of medicines are typically impacted when generic competition sets in; such price erosion does not affect medical devices in the same way and revenue could be severely impacted through reclassification.

For more information, contact Els Janssens and Olha Sviatenka.


1 Medical Devices Directive (93/42/EEC); In Vitro Diagnostic Medical Devices Directive (98/9/EC) and Active Implantable Medical Devices Directive (90/385/EEC).

2 Guidance on the borderline between medical devices and medicinal products (MDCG 2022-5); Guidance on classification of medical device (MDCG 2021-24) and the Helsinki Procedure. The latter procedure has existed since 2002 but was revised in 2021 to align with the MDR and IVDR. It allows consultation among competent authorities on borderline and classification issues concerning medical devices with the aim of encouraging common positions. It also ensures that appropriate guidance is published in the manual on borderline & classification for medical devices.

3 Cfr. Macrogol Cases I and II - German Bundesgerichtshof - judgements of 12/10/2009 and 11/24/2010.


Copyright © 2024 Baker & McKenzie. All rights reserved. Ownership: This documentation and content (Content) is a proprietary resource owned exclusively by Baker McKenzie (meaning Baker & McKenzie International and its member firms). The Content is protected under international copyright conventions. Use of this Content does not of itself create a contractual relationship, nor any attorney/client relationship, between Baker McKenzie and any person. Non-reliance and exclusion: All Content is for informational purposes only and may not reflect the most current legal and regulatory developments. All summaries of the laws, regulations and practice are subject to change. The Content is not offered as legal or professional advice for any specific matter. It is not intended to be a substitute for reference to (and compliance with) the detailed provisions of applicable laws, rules, regulations or forms. Legal advice should always be sought before taking any action or refraining from taking any action based on any Content. Baker McKenzie and the editors and the contributing authors do not guarantee the accuracy of the Content and expressly disclaim any and all liability to any person in respect of the consequences of anything done or permitted to be done or omitted to be done wholly or partly in reliance upon the whole or any part of the Content. The Content may contain links to external websites and external websites may link to the Content. Baker McKenzie is not responsible for the content or operation of any such external sites and disclaims all liability, howsoever occurring, in respect of the content or operation of any such external websites. Attorney Advertising: This Content may qualify as “Attorney Advertising” requiring notice in some jurisdictions. To the extent that this Content may qualify as Attorney Advertising, PRIOR RESULTS DO NOT GUARANTEE A SIMILAR OUTCOME. Reproduction: Reproduction of reasonable portions of the Content is permitted provided that (i) such reproductions are made available free of charge and for non-commercial purposes, (ii) such reproductions are properly attributed to Baker McKenzie, (iii) the portion of the Content being reproduced is not altered or made available in a manner that modifies the Content or presents the Content being reproduced in a false light and (iv) notice is made to the disclaimers included on the Content. The permission to re-copy does not allow for incorporation of any substantial portion of the Content in any work or publication, whether in hard copy, electronic or any other form or for commercial purposes.