Complizen Learn

Yes, there are AI-powered tools that can help with parts of an FDA 510(k) submission. The key is understanding which parts AI can support well , and which parts still require human regulatory judgment . AI is most useful when the work is research-heavy and repetitive, like finding relevant FDA sources, comparing predicates, and keeping evidence organized. AI is least useful when the work depends on company-specific strategy decisions, risk acceptance, or negotiating tradeoffs

FDA inspects medical device manufacturers to verify compliance with 21 CFR Part 820 quality system requirements , using a structured approach often associated with the QSIT  inspection method. Inspections can be routine surveillance  or for-cause , such as follow-up to significant complaints, recalls, or other risk signals. Plan 8–24 weeks  to get inspection-ready by closing CAPA gaps, organizing DHF and DMR records, confirming complaint handling, and running a mock audit. Du

For most Class II medical devices cleared through the 510(k) pathway , companies should plan for multiple years from concept to commercial launch , not months. While every product is different, 18–36 months  is a common planning range once design complexity, testing, and regulatory realities are accounted for. FDA does not publish end-to-end “time-to-market” timelines. Delays usually come from underestimating development effort, testing lead times, and regulatory iteration ,

FDA expects performance testing that demonstrates your device functions as intended and does not raise different questions of safety or effectiveness compared to your predicate. The scope of testing depends on device type, risk, and technological differences, but most 510(k)s include bench or performance testing , software validation where applicable , and biocompatibility assessment for patient-contacting components . This guide shows you exactly which tests FDA requires for

If FDA disagrees with your predicate choice, you'll get an Additional Information (AI) request or a Not Substantially Equivalent (NSE) determination. AI requests often add months and require either: (1) switching to a different predicate, (2) providing stronger substantial equivalence rationale, or (3) withdrawing and refiling. Not Substantially Equivalent (NSE) determination usually means you must submit new 510(k) with different predicate or pursue De Novo. This guide walks

Human Factors Engineering (HFE), also called usability engineering, is how FDA expects you to show that intended users can operate your device safely and effectively in the intended use environment, especially when use error could cause harm. For many higher-risk device types, FDA often expects human factors data in 510(k)s and PMAs, and it is common to see it in De Novo programs when the user interface drives risk. If you change a user interface in a way that can affect comp

A new 510(k) is required if a modification could significantly affect the safety or effectiveness of the device  or represents a major change in intended use , per 21 CFR 807.81(a)(3) . FDA expects manufacturers to use its 2017 decision flowcharts  and a documented, risk-based assessment comparing the change to the most recently cleared device . Poor decisions can lead to costly enforcement, recalls, or unnecessary submissions. Every medical device company with a cleared 510(

A 510(k) submission costs between $50,000 and $250,000+ depending on device complexity, testing requirements, and whether you use consultants. Core costs include FDA user fees ($6,517-$26,067), testing/validation ($20,000-$150,000+), consultant fees ($15,000-$50,000), and establishment registration ($11,423). Most startups underestimate by 40-60%, with hidden costs from AI requests, design changes, and regulatory delays adding $30,000-$100,000+ to initial budgets. You've bui

FDA 510(k) submissions most often stumble on preventable issues: incomplete or non-compliant admin packets at Refuse to Accept (RTA) review, weak or inconsistent device descriptions and indications for use, poor predicate selection, missing or insufficient testing data, and failure to follow device-specific FDA guidance. Historically, RTA refusal rates have climbed as high as ~60% of new 510(k)s, and even in recent years roughly one-third of submissions hit an RTA hold at lea

A medical device regulatory strategy is your comprehensive plan for achieving FDA clearance or approval. It includes device classification, pathway selection (510(k), De Novo, or PMA), resource planning (team, budget, consultants), timeline mapping, testing strategy, and risk mitigation. Build it during concept phase—before design freeze or testing begins—to avoid expensive mistakes and accelerate market entry. Companies that build regulatory strategy during concept phase mak

To bring a medical device to the U.S. market: (1) Classify your device (Class I, II, or III), (2) select your regulatory pathway (510(k), De Novo, or PMA), (3) complete required testing, (4) prepare and submit your FDA application, and (5) maintain post-clearance QMS compliance. Timeline ranges from 3-6 months for 510(k) to 1-3 years for PMA. This guide provides the complete roadmap from concept to U.S. market launch, with decision frameworks at each stage to help you avoid t

The FDA’s 510(k) Third-Party Review Program (3P510k)  is a voluntary alternative pathway  allowing accredited organizations  to review certain eligible Class I and II medical devices  instead of FDA performing the full review.Third-party reviewers forward their technical recommendation to FDA, which aims to issue a final clearance decision within about 30 calendar days  of receiving the complete review package. By using the 3P510k route, you avoid paying FDA user fees , thoug

Preparing your first FDA submission involves five critical steps: classify your device accurately, determine the appropriate regulatory pathway (510(k), De Novo, or PMA), gather required technical and clinical documentation, consider engaging FDA through a Pre-Submission meeting, and submit through FDA's electronic systems with proper formatting and user fees. This guide provides practical, step-by-step preparation strategies specifically for startup founders navigating their

FDA reviews AI and machine learning medical devices using a regulatory framework designed for adaptive software that learns over time. The approach includes Predetermined Change Control Plans (PCCPs) that allow pre-approved algorithm modifications without additional submissions, Good Machine Learning Practice guidelines, and lifecycle management requirements addressing transparency and bias concerns. This guide covers FDA's AI/ML regulatory framework, submission requirements,

A Design History File (DHF) is a mandatory compilation of records documenting how a medical device was designed and developed according to FDA requirements under 21 CFR Part 820.30. The DHF demonstrates that design controls were followed throughout development and serves as primary evidence during FDA audits and regulatory submissions. This guide covers DHF requirements, contents, creation process, and compliance strategies to help you build audit-ready documentation. What Is

FDA device registration and listing is a mandatory annual process where medical device companies register their facilities and list their specific products with FDA. Registration identifies WHO makes devices, while listing identifies WHAT devices are made. Both are required before commercial distribution in the US. This guide covers requirements, deadlines, fees, and step-by-step compliance to help you avoid delays and maintain market access. What Is FDA Device Registration a

FDA device inspections follow QSIT (Quality System Inspection Technique). Set a host/scribe front room  and SME back room , stage core QMS records ( design controls, CAPA, complaints, process controls ), rehearse interviews, and track every document request. On arrival, log Form FDA 482 ; at closeout, capture the exact 483  wording and submit a written CAPA  (Corrective And Preventive Action) response within 15 business days . This guide provides the systematic approach regul

FDA compliance for medical devices isn't optional - it's the gateway to the largest medical device market. In the US, “FDA compliance” means: classify  the product (Class I/II/III), choose the correct route— 510(k) clearance , De Novo classification , PMA approval , or 510(k)-exempt —run a compliant quality system  (QSR until Feb 2, 2026 ; QMSR  afterward), apply labeling/UDI  rules, register & list  establishments/devices, and meet postmarket  duties (MDR 803, corrections/re

A combination product combines a medical device with a drug, biologic, or both as a single-entity , co-packaged , or cross-labeled  configuration (21 CFR 3.2(e) ). FDA classification depends on the Primary Mode of Action (PMOA) - whichever component provides the most therapeutic benefit determines which FDA center reviews your product and which regulations apply; if unclear, the Office of Combination Products  decides, and an RFD  yields a binding designation within 60 days  

A predicate device is a legally marketed U.S. device with the same intended use and technological characteristics that do not raise different questions of safety and effectiveness compared with your device. Find candidates in FDA’s Product Classification Database (by product code), FDA’s 510(k) database (by device name/manufacturer), and AccessGUDID (public UDI)—which often lists premarket submission numbers you can pivot on. Pick well and you streamline review; pick poorly a