ISO 13485:2016 certified · Startup India (DPIIT) recognised · NVIDIA Inception program member +91 44 4690 0555info@medoqi.tech
Home/Insights
Knowledge Centre

Regulatory Intelligence & Knowledge Centre

Briefings, technical guides and expert commentary on medical device and IVD regulation, written by our specialists.

Regulatory updatesTechnical guidesWhite papersWebinarsExpert commentary
Quality systems · Regulatory updateOctober 2026

FDA QMSR in force: what inspectors can now see

Since 2 February 2026, 21 CFR Part 820 incorporates ISO 13485:2016 by reference. The biggest practical change for many manufacturers is visibility: management review, quality audit and supplier audit reports are no longer exempt from FDA inspection.

Read the briefing

What stays FDA-specific. The regulation keeps requirements beyond ISO 13485, including content requirements for complaint and servicing records, UDI, and labelling and packaging controls, and links to medical device reporting and corrections and removals.

Terminology. The QSR terms design history file, device master record and device history record are no longer defined. Legacy records remain useful, but their content must satisfy the ISO 13485 clauses that now apply.

Four practical steps. Review management review records as if an investigator will read them. Reconcile legacy DHF, DMR and DHR content. Check that complaint records capture the MDR reportability determination. Run a QMSR-style mock inspection.

QMSR readiness services →
IVD · Technical guideOctober 2026

How SVR, APR and CPR come together in the PER

IVDR performance evidence rests on three pillars. Scientific validity, analytical performance and clinical performance are reported separately, then integrated in the performance evaluation report.

Read the guide

Scientific validity shows the association between the analyte and the clinical condition or physiological state, from literature, consensus and proof-of-concept data.

Analytical performance shows the device detects or measures the analyte correctly: precision, trueness, limits of detection and quantitation, analytical specificity, interference, measuring range and stability.

Clinical performance shows results correlate with the clinical condition in the intended population: diagnostic sensitivity and specificity, predictive values and expected values.

Common gaps. Scientific validity resting on a single source; analytical studies on one reagent lot; clinical claims beyond the studied population; PMPF plans not linked to residual uncertainties.

IVD services →
Clinical · Technical guideOctober 2026

Literature reviews that hold up at Notified Body review

Reviewers check the method before the conclusions. A review that cannot be reproduced invites questions regardless of what it concludes.

Read the guide

Protocol first. Agree questions, databases, search strings and inclusion criteria before searching, and record any deviations.

Reproducible searches. Record databases, dates, full strings and hit counts so anyone can repeat the search.

Appraisal and traceability. Document why each source was included or excluded, how it was appraised and which conclusion it supports.

Common gaps. Strings that cannot be rerun, no appraisal criteria, favourable sources only, and conclusions with no traceable source.

Clinical evaluation services →
Post-market · Expert commentaryOctober 2026

Reportability: human decisions, AI assistance

Reporting clocks run from awareness, and they differ by market: 2, 10 or 15 days in the EU depending on severity, and 5 work days or 30 calendar days in the US.

Read the commentary

Where AI helps. Consistent coding, first-pass seriousness screening, surfacing similar past events and tracking every clock that applies to one event.

Where people decide. Judgements about seriousness, causality and whether an event could have led to serious harm. These need clinical and regulatory judgement, and the manufacturer owns the decision.

What does not change. The manufacturer's legal reporting obligations, whatever tools and service providers it uses.

Post-market services →
Global markets · Expert commentaryOctober 2026

Japan to global: taking a PMD Act device to the EU and US

Japanese manufacturers already hold much of the technical evidence the EU and US expect. The work is in structure, clinical evidence expectations and post-market systems.

Read the commentary

What transfers. Test data, risk management and a QMS aligned with ISO 13485 through Ministerial Ordinance No. 169.

What changes. MDR Annex II documentation structure, clinical evaluation and PMCF expectations, FDA predicate logic for 510(k), and an EU Authorised Representative or US Agent.

Our route. AI-assisted gap assessment of the existing dossier, expert delta review, targeted remediation, submission support until certification, then post-market and complaint handling.

Japan market page →
Newsletter

Regulatory updates by email

A short update when rules that affect device and IVD manufacturers change: new guidance, deadlines and enforcement trends.

Join the update list →