Medical Device 'Significant Changes' – Navigating EU MDR Article 120(3) using MDCG 2020-3 rev. 1

Shen May Khoo
A pile of question marks

With the transition to the EU MDR, legacy devices with certificates issued under the old EU directives (Directive 93/42/EEC on medical devices, MDD, and Directive 90/385/EEC on active implantable medical devices, AIMDD) can stay on the market under the transitional provisions set out in Article 120(3) of the MDR, provided they do not undergo any significant changes.

In this article, we explain the concept of a ‘significant change’ and, using examples, help you understand whether you can still take advantage of the transitional arrangements in MDR Article 120(3).

Transition periods

The transition periods in Article 120(3) MDR as per Regulation (EU) 2023/607 are as follows:

  • Class III and IIb implants: new transition period until 31 December 2027
  • Class IIb and lower: new transition period until 31 December 2028
  • Class III custom-made products: new transition period until 31 December 2026
  • No ‘sell-off’ deadline

What does significant change mean?

A significant change in the design or intended purpose consists of two cumulative elements:

  • There is a change in the design or intended purpose, and
  • The change is significant

Therefore, changes that do not concern the design or intended purpose are out of scope of Article 120(3) of the MDR. Changes that concern the design or intended purpose only fall under Article 120(3) if they are considered ‘significant’.

Responsibilities of medical device manufacturers regarding ‘significance’ of changes

Medical device manufacturers have two primary responsibilities regarding changes:

  • provide evidence and justification that a change does not affect the design or intended purpose, or
  • in cases where the change affects the design or intended purpose of the device, that it is non-significant.

The outcome of this assessment should be documented and made available to a competent authority when requested.

If a change to a legacy device is not a significant change in design or intended purpose, it can be implemented using the above transitional arrangement. In these instances, manufacturers must adhere to the documentation criteria of AIMDD/MDD, meaning that the revised technical documentation must enable the evaluation of the product’s compliance with the relevant standards.

Determining a significant change to the design or intended purpose

The MDCG 2020-3 rev. 1 guidance document sets out whether a change in the design or intended purpose of a device is considered ‘significant’ within the meaning of EU MDR Article 120(3c), point (b).

Examples of changes in design and/or intended purpose that are ‘non-significant’:

  • Changes related to corrective actions assessed and accepted by the competent authority
  • Correction of spelling mistakes or merely editorial changes of the information to be supplied with the device (e.g. label or instructions for use)
  • Clarifications of intended purpose, population, or clinical application in the information to be supplied with the device in line with the original certification
  • Updates of the information to be supplied with the device (e.g. label, instructions for use or implant card) if they are required by EU legislation other than the MDR, are mere clarifications and do not adversely affect the devices’ safety and performance in relation to existing or new risks

The following diagram, taken from the MDCG 2020-3 rev. 1, helps understand when changes in design and/or intended purpose may be considered ‘significant’:

Design changes and changes of the intended purpose which may be considered 'significant' when interpreting Art. 120(3c), point (b) MDR – Main Chart
Design changes and changes of the intended purpose which may be considered 'significant' when interpreting Art. 120(3c), point (b) MDR – Main Chart taken from MDCG 2020-3 rev. 1

Charts A to E in the MDCG guideline contain specific areas where changes in the intended purpose, device design, device software, changes related to a substance or material or changes related to sterilisation are likely to be held to be significant. It’s vital to consult these charts when understanding whether a change will be significant and, by extension, whether your device can make use of the transitional arrangement.

In summary

The definition of a “significant change” involves two cumulative elements: a change in design or intended purpose that is deemed significant. Manufacturers bear the responsibility of determining and justifying whether a change in their medical device is significant or not, and therefore whether relevant technical documents require updating in line with the changes. The MDCG 2020-3 rev. 1 guidance document provides guidance on determining the significance of changes in design or intended purpose.

For further information regarding how we can meet your MDR requirements, including advice on whether changes are likely to be significant, please contact us for a free and confidential discussion.

Useful resources

Related guide topics

Back to top

Related articles

  1. A pile of question marks

    Mantra Systems at MEDICA 2023

    Mantra Systems is going to MEDICA 2023, the largest medical trade fair in the world. We hope to see you there.

    Shen May Khoo Shen May Khoo Junior Regulatory Specialist
  2. A signpost giving unsure directions

    MDR or IVDR - A sibling rivalry?

    A guide to easily understanding whether your device is a medical device or an in vitro diagnostic medical device (IVD).

    Dr Gayle Buchel Dr Gayle Buchel Lead Medical Writer
  3. An EU and UK flag

    What the latest Brexit U-turn means for CE Marking of medical devices in Great Britain

    Will Great Britain continue to allow the use of the CE mark for medical devices beyond the 2024 deadline?

    Dr Hanna Gul Dr Hanna Gul Lead Medical Writer
  4. A woman writing her own medical device regulation documentation

    Gain confidence, reassurance and control over your EU MDR strategy

    Find out how to build your own technical files within a guided framework while minimising financial outlays.

    Dr Gayle Buchel Dr Gayle Buchel Lead Medical Writer
  5. Racing to achieve MDR compliance

    Still racing to achieve MDR compliance? A transition period update

    On January 6th 2023, the EU commission has adopted the proposal to extend the transition rules of the EU MDR.

    Sandra Gopinath Sandra Gopinath Senior Regulatory Specialist
  6. An update on UKCA Marking of Medical Devices

    UKCA Marking of Medical Devices – An update on the status quo

    We review recently updated requirements for UKCA marking and what it means for your regulatory strategy.

    Dr Hanna Gul Dr Hanna Gul Lead Medical Writer
  7. Achieving MDR Compliance for Class I medical devices

    How to achieve MDR Compliance for Class I medical devices

    We outline a strategy for the regulatory compliance of Class I medical devices.

    Sandra Gopinath Sandra Gopinath Senior Regulatory Specialist
  8. Ensure medical device regulatory compliance of your devices through Brexit

    The impact of Brexit on medical device regulatory compliance

    How to ensure regulatory alignment of your devices in the territories affected by Brexit.

    Dr Paul Hercock Dr Paul Hercock Chief Executive Officer
  9. Coronavirus and medical device regulations

    Relaxing medical device regulatory requirements during a healthcare crisis

    During the coronavirus pandemic, how far should we go when relaxing medical device regulatory requirements?

    Dr Paul Hercock Dr Paul Hercock Chief Executive Officer
  10. EU flag

    A proposal to delay the EU MDR gets approved

    A vote in the European Parliament has decisively approved a delay to full implementation of the EU MDR by one year.

    Richard Jones Richard Jones Systems Manager
  11. EU regulators may delay MDR enforcement

    EU regulators may delay MDR enforcement. Out of the woods?

    A delay of the MDR would be welcome news for many, but what would a delay mean in practice? To what extent can preparations for EU MDR be put on ice?

    Dr Paul Hercock Dr Paul Hercock Chief Executive Officer
  12. The new MDR compliance challenge

    The new MDR compliance challenge

    Across the industry, medical device companies are facing challenges in meeting the demands of the new Medical Device Regulations (MDR) 2017/745 framework.

    Dr Paul Hercock Dr Paul Hercock Chief Executive Officer

More articles

Do you need help with your regulatory strategy?

Talk to us