Structure and content of the EU-IVDR: current status and implications for pathology

  • Background Regulation (EU) 2017/746 on in vitro diagnostic medical devices (IVDR) was passed by the European Parliament and the Council of the European Union on 5 April 2017 and came into force on 26 May 2017. A new amending regulation, which introduces a phased implementation of the IVDR with new transitional provisions for certain in vitro diagnostic medical devices (IVDs) and a later date of application of some requirements for in-house devices for healthcare facilities, was adopted on 15 December 2021. The combined use of CE-certified IVDs (CE-IVDs), in-house IVDs (IH-IVDs), and research use only (RUO) devices are a cornerstone of diagnostics in pathology departments and crucial for optimal patient care. The IVDR not only regulates the manufacture and placement on the market of industrially manufactured IVDs, but also imposes conditions on the manufacture and use of IH-IVDs for internal use by healthcare facilities. Objectives Our work provides an overview of theBackground Regulation (EU) 2017/746 on in vitro diagnostic medical devices (IVDR) was passed by the European Parliament and the Council of the European Union on 5 April 2017 and came into force on 26 May 2017. A new amending regulation, which introduces a phased implementation of the IVDR with new transitional provisions for certain in vitro diagnostic medical devices (IVDs) and a later date of application of some requirements for in-house devices for healthcare facilities, was adopted on 15 December 2021. The combined use of CE-certified IVDs (CE-IVDs), in-house IVDs (IH-IVDs), and research use only (RUO) devices are a cornerstone of diagnostics in pathology departments and crucial for optimal patient care. The IVDR not only regulates the manufacture and placement on the market of industrially manufactured IVDs, but also imposes conditions on the manufacture and use of IH-IVDs for internal use by healthcare facilities. Objectives Our work provides an overview of the background and structure of the IVDR and identifies core areas that need to be interpreted and fleshed out in the context of the legal framework as well as expert knowledge. Conclusions The gaps and ambiguities in the IVDR crucially require the expertise of professional societies, alliances, and individual stakeholders to successfully facilitate the implementation and use of the IVDR in pathology departments and to avoid aberrant developments.show moreshow less

Download full text files

Export metadata

Statistics

Number of document requests

Additional Services

Share in Twitter Search Google Scholar
Metadaten
Author:Andy Kahles, Hannah Goldschmid, Anna-Lena Volckmar, Carolin Ploeger, Daniel Kazdal, Roland Penzel, Jan Budczies, Gisela Kempny, Marlon Kazmierczak, Christa Flechtenmacher, Gustavo Baretton, Wilko Weichert, David Horst, Frederick Klauschen, Ulrich M. GassnerGND, Monika Brüggemann, Michael Vogeser, Peter Schirmacher, Albrecht Stenzinger
URN:urn:nbn:de:bvb:384-opus4-1039104
Frontdoor URLhttps://opus.bibliothek.uni-augsburg.de/opus4/103910
ISSN:2731-7188OPAC
ISSN:2731-7196OPAC
Parent Title (German):Die Pathologie
Publisher:Springer Medizin
Place of publication:Berlin
Type:Article
Language:English
Year of first Publication:2023
Publishing Institution:Universität Augsburg
Release Date:2023/04/25
Volume:44
First Page:73
Last Page:85
DOI:https://doi.org/10.1007/s00292-022-01176-z
Institutes:Juristische Fakultät
Juristische Fakultät / Institut für Öffentliches Recht
Juristische Fakultät / Institut für Öffentliches Recht / Professur für Öffentliches Recht
Dewey Decimal Classification:3 Sozialwissenschaften / 34 Recht / 340 Recht
Licence (German):CC-BY 4.0: Creative Commons: Namensnennung (mit Print on Demand)