Cybersecurity Guidances for Medical Devices: An MDCG and FDA Regulatory Comparison

This paper compares the distinct cybersecurity requirements for certifying connected medical devices (CMDs) in the EU and the US, as outlined in the MDCG 2019–16 guidance and the FDA premarket and postmarket guidances, respectively. By examining both the organizational approaches of the MDCG and FDA and their specific guidance documents, this study identifies key differences and areas of convergence. Findings, informed by stakeholder feedback gathered within the Horizon Europe NEMECYS project, reveal a notable disparity, with CMD stakeholders expressing significant dissatisfaction with the current EU regulatory framework, particularly regarding its applicability and clarity. The analysis highlights the strengths and weaknesses of each approach from a practical implementation perspective. Ultimately, the paper emphasizes the critical need for the European regulatory landscape to evolve towards clearer and more actionable guidance, especially in rapidly emerging fields like AI-driven medical devices, to effectively support the secure advancement of CMDs.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Published
2025-06-16
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1109/smartcomp65954.2025.00079
Primary Topic
Safety Systems Engineering in Autonomy
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Cybersecurity Guidances for Medical Devices: An MDCG and FDA Regulatory Comparison

Adamantios Ntanis, Christos Androutsos, Andrea Neverdal Skytterholm, Martin Gilje Jaatun
Safety Systems Engineering in Autonomy
article

Cybersecurity Guidances for Medical Devices: An MDCG and FDA Regulatory Comparison

Adamantios Ntanis, Christos Androutsos, Andrea Neverdal Skytterholm, Martin Gilje Jaatun
article en

Abstract

This paper compares the distinct cybersecurity requirements for certifying connected medical devices (CMDs) in the EU and the US, as outlined in the MDCG 2019–16 guidance and the FDA premarket and postmarket guidances, respectively. By examining both the organizational approaches of the MDCG and FDA and their specific guidance documents, this study identifies key differences and areas of convergence. Findings, informed by stakeholder feedback gathered within the Horizon Europe NEMECYS project, reveal a notable disparity, with CMD stakeholders expressing significant dissatisfaction with the current EU regulatory framework, particularly regarding its applicability and clarity. The analysis highlights the strengths and weaknesses of each approach from a practical implementation perspective. Ultimately, the paper emphasizes the critical need for the European regulatory landscape to evolve towards clearer and more actionable guidance, especially in rapidly emerging fields like AI-driven medical devices, to effectively support the secure advancement of CMDs.

SINTEF (NO), University of Ioannina (GR), SINTEF Digital
Openalex Percentile: Top 81%
Safety Systems Engineering in Autonomy
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Cybersecurity Guidances for Medical Devices: An MDCG and FDA Regulatory Comparison — Adamantios Ntanis, Christos Androutsos, et al. · (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS