Regulatory Frameworks for Orphan Medical Device: A Comparative Review of USFDA and EU Approaches

Approval and development of medical products dealing with rare illnesses, referred to as orphan devices, present special regulation and clinical issue because of small patient requirements, significant development expenses, and low commercial appeal. The paper entails a comparative evaluation of the regulatory standards implemented by the United States food and drug administration (USFDA) as well as the European Union (EU) in dealing with these challenges. The USFDA has now created specific methods to accelerate orphan devices with their Humanitarian Use Device (HUD) and Humanitarian Device exemption (HDE) programs, which have more relaxed standards of clinical evidence and ease of entry of an orphan to the market by utilizing Institutional Review Board (IRB)-approved use. By comparison, the EU covers the subject of orphan devices with the Medical Device Regulation (MDR) 2017/745, not giving them a specific orphan pathway, which requires a stricter procedure of conformity assessment and increased amount of premarket clinical evidence. This paper presents the definitions, the approval methods, post-marketing surveillance requirements, and challenges peculiar to each of the regions. Although the US system focuses on faster access among limited data, the EU system prefers high safety and performance requirements. The review comes to the conclusion that harmonization, or mutual learning of these regulatory systems, may promote both innovation and patient safety especially concerning the SMEs and patients with rare medical conditions.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
˜The œBioscan.
Published
2025-08-07
DOI
https://doi.org/10.63001/tbs.2025.v20.i03.s.i(3).pp286-293
Primary Topic
Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Regulatory Frameworks for Orphan Medical Device: A Comparative Review of USFDA and EU Approaches

Raju Kamaraj, S KUBERAN
˜The œBioscan.
Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
article

Regulatory Frameworks for Orphan Medical Device: A Comparative Review of USFDA and EU Approaches

Raju Kamaraj, S KUBERAN
article en

Abstract

Approval and development of medical products dealing with rare illnesses, referred to as orphan devices, present special regulation and clinical issue because of small patient requirements, significant development expenses, and low commercial appeal. The paper entails a comparative evaluation of the regulatory standards implemented by the United States food and drug administration (USFDA) as well as the European Union (EU) in dealing with these challenges. The USFDA has now created specific methods to accelerate orphan devices with their Humanitarian Use Device (HUD) and Humanitarian Device exemption (HDE) programs, which have more relaxed standards of clinical evidence and ease of entry of an orphan to the market by utilizing Institutional Review Board (IRB)-approved use. By comparison, the EU covers the subject of orphan devices with the Medical Device Regulation (MDR) 2017/745, not giving them a specific orphan pathway, which requires a stricter procedure of conformity assessment and increased amount of premarket clinical evidence. This paper presents the definitions, the approval methods, post-marketing surveillance requirements, and challenges peculiar to each of the regions. Although the US system focuses on faster access among limited data, the EU system prefers high safety and performance requirements. The review comes to the conclusion that harmonization, or mutual learning of these regulatory systems, may promote both innovation and patient safety especially concerning the SMEs and patients with rare medical conditions.

˜The œBioscan.Vol. 20(Special Issue-3)
Openalex Percentile: Top 71%
Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
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.