Special 510(k) or New Traditional - Currently Inactive Products

Q

QM Becky

Hi Everyone! I hope this post finds you all well!

I have a situation, I think I know the answer, but need some confirmation/opinions...who better to ask! :)

We have a number of 510(k)s that we own, but under which we are not currently or actively manufacturing and marketing products. These were part of an asset purchase of a company a few years ago, and our development team is now redesigning/resurrecting one of these product lines.

We know we will have to at a minimum submit a special 510(k) as there are some material changes that we are making to the product.

My question is really should we actually be submitting a new Traditional 510(k) all together. I think we should... but sometimes I'm overly conservative, so I need a gut check.

The very first question in the FDA's checklist for the submission of a Special 510(k) asks if it is being "submitted to modify a legally marketed device". Technically, I contend that no... it's not, because while we COULD legally market the device described in the 510(k), we are not, and have not for many years. I'm not even 100% sure that the company we acquired it from every actually did either. They purchased it in a sale a few years earlier and I don't believe they ever actual had them manufactured and marketed.

To further complicate matters, I don't have any of the predicate devices described in the original 510(k) - they've been discontinued - and I don't have any of our devices... because they've not been manufactured... meaning side-by-side testing is going to be a challenge. I do have some test results, but the older 510(k) is pretty vague and frankly, not very well put together.

So the question is.... special - with nearly all new data and full remediation of the original... or New/Traditional. I tend to lean toward new/traditional... but that extends the timeline for our project, which of course, no one wants me to do.

Really appreciate your thoughts on this one.
 
Ronen E

Ronen E

Problem Solver
Moderator
QM Becky said:
The very first question in the FDA's checklist for the submission of a Special 510(k) asks if it is being "submitted to modify a legally marketed device". Technically, I contend that no... it's not, because while we COULD legally market the device described in the 510(k), we are not, and have not for many years. I'm not even 100% sure that the company we acquired it from every actually did either. They purchased it in a sale a few years earlier and I don't believe they ever actual had them manufactured and marketed.
Click to expand...

All this is quite irrelevant. In FDA's terminology "legally marketed device" equals "has a cleared 510k or PMA", regardless of actual marketing in the everyday meaning.

QM Becky said:
To further complicate matters, I don't have any of the predicate devices described in the original 510(k) - they've been discontinued - and I don't have any of our devices... because they've not been manufactured... meaning side-by-side testing is going to be a challenge. I do have some test results, but the older 510(k) is pretty vague and frankly, not very well put together.
Click to expand...

If you submit a Special, your predicate will be "your" original device and not the predicate of the original 510k, so the older predicate will be mostly irrelevant. Second, for a special 510(k) submission you don't necessarily need side-by-side testing. Since both predicate and new version are yours (sort of :)), a theoretical comparison, including sufficient technical details, might be enough. Focus on the changes, you don't need to "prove" that the rest has stayed the same - that's the default premise in a Special. If you have the original specifications for the features / functions that are changing (eg drawings, BOMs), that should do.

Besides, if you go for a Traditional you will still have all the same issues with the predicate / establishing a baseline.

QM Becky said:
So the question is.... special - with nearly all new data and full remediation of the original... or New/Traditional. I tend to lean toward new/traditional... but that extends the timeline for our project, which of course, no one wants me to do.
Click to expand...

I'd go for a Special, no matter how "thick" the file will be. It should be more streamlined.

BTW, there's no requirement to "fix" all the old submission's shortfalls while you're at it. Just make sure that the new submission is up to mark.

Good luck,
Ronen.
 
mihzago

mihzago

Trusted Information Resource
I agree with Ronen.
I will add a few more thoughts.
You may have to file a Traditional if you change the indications for use (e.g. expand patient population), and/or require clinical data to demonstrate safety and effectiveness. From your description it seems you're just changing the material so Special should work.

You will also have to describe an changes made to the device since the last 510(k); there may have been some changes before your company acquired the assets, but that does not change the submission type.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
S Traditional or Special 510(k) US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 7
Watchcat Advantages to pursuing a Special 510(k) instead of a Traditional 510(k) Other US Medical Device Regulations 5
F Replacement Bone Screws - Traditional 510(k) or Special 510(k)? Other US Medical Device Regulations 7
S Special 510(k) for orthopedic implant 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 4
S Special 510(K) - Labeling change from Rx to OTC Other US Medical Device Regulations 11
M Informational US FDA Final Guidance – Special Premarket Notification [510(k)] Pathway Medical Device and FDA Regulations and Standards News 0
K Letter to file vs Special 510 for additional accessory in orthopaedic kit Other US Medical Device Regulations 1
P Special 510(k) - Modified Medical Device Description Other US Medical Device Regulations 8
E Special 510(k) for software change Other US Medical Device Regulations 1
B Submit a Special 510(k) or "Documentation by our own" 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 5
J Can we submit data with Special 510(k)? US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 8
D Question surrounding Special 510(k) in regards to Software Change 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 15
C Locating Approved Special 510(k) Submission Data from 1997 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 2
M Is a Special 510(k) required? Change in the Plasticizer of a Nasogastric Tube 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 5
B Deciding when to submit a Special 510(k) US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 10
M Special 510(k) FDA experience? US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 10
D Design Verification for special 510(k) - Size modification to an existing medical device 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 7
C Design control documentation provided in special 510(k) + FDA response 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 2
C Application for special 510(k) - What are the documents to submit to FDA? 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 1
L CQI-9 Special Process: Heat Treat System for Sinter parts IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 0
J Special Characteristic Symbols On FCA Drawings Inspection, Prints (Drawings), Testing, Sampling and Related Topics 4
L CQI-30 Special Process: Rubber Processing System Assessment - Mixing & Molding IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 4
V Sample Size rationale to reduce size and use special levels EU Medical Device Regulations 6
Z 10993-7 Special Populations and Area Other Medical Device Related Standards 1
S Defining special characteristics beyond customer drawing FMEA and Control Plans 11
N 8.3.3.3 Special characteristics - Auditor said we are required to create our own, if no customer char. exist. IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 10
G Special needs operators : how to treat trainings and etc ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 4
D 8.5.1.2 Validation and control of special processes requirements for Heat Treat External Processor AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 4
Casana Mentioning Special Characteristics in SOP FMEA and Control Plans 4
M Contact with special interest groups IEC 27001 - Information Security Management Systems (ISMS) 1
B SPECIAL PROCESS VALIDATION & REVALIDATION Qualification and Validation (including 21 CFR Part 11) 5
Watchcat REGULATORY WATCHCAT - De Novo Proposed Rule - Special Controls and Standards Other US Medical Device Regulations 0
A Special Characteristic question from Automotive CSR Customer and Company Specific Requirements 9
N Validation of special processes - thread closed Oil and Gas Industry Standards and Regulations 3
John C. Abnet Special Status Notification IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 1
D Special IATF audit of sub-supplier IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 18
A IRIS audit - Discussion about Special Processes General Auditing Discussions 11
S SOP Identification of Special Characteristics IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 9
B AS9102 - 3D printing a special tool required for assembly (counterfeit risk?) AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 12
Nihls MSA Study Type 2 (special conditions ) IEC 60601 - Medical Electrical Equipment Safety Standards Series 0
Techilady Ford Special Characteristics Communication and Agreement Form (SCCAF) provides production requirements? FMEA and Control Plans 4
R Critical Characteristics & Special Characteristics FMEA and Control Plans 2
P Letter to file or special 510k or traditional 510k 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 2
S OEM full range calibrations vs Validation special test points Medical Device and FDA Regulations and Standards News 1
G Special 510K possible? Only the packaging has changed Other US Medical Device Regulations 0
N Riveting - special process Manufacturing and Related Processes 12
H AS9100D clause 8.5.1 f) ＆ 8.5.1 g) - Special Processes AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 2
C AIAG-VDA PFMEA - 1st special Characteristics? [5step vs. 6step] FMEA and Control Plans 3
J 1.11 Preliminary Identification of Special Product and Process Characteristics APQP and PPAP 4
earl62 What is the best way to control special characteristics in Control plan? Is it Mandatory to have SPC for IATF 16949? IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 12

Similar threads

Top Bottom