EU MDR • Regulatory Affairs

EU MDR Transition - MDD to MDR Gap Closure

Published • • 8 min read

Merging the IFUs together for Femoral 3 showed that the technical documentation correlation tables (Table 2/3-style mappings) are the backbone of an MDR technical file, get the cross-reference wrong once and every downstream reviewer inherits the error.

Merging multiple IFUs into a single Femoral 3 document meant every cross-reference in the correlation tables had to hold up, since a single wrong mapping would carry forward into every reviewer who relied on it downstream.

One wrong cross-reference, many inherited errors

A technical documentation correlation table is only as reliable as its weakest cross-reference. Merging IFUs together multiplies the number of places a single mapping error can resurface.

Merging the IFUs required:
  • Mapping each MDD-era requirement/document against its MDR equivalent using the technical documentation correlation tables
  • Verifying against applicable harmonized standards
  • Tracking action items to closure in the quality plan

What an unmapped requirement risks

An MDD-era requirement with no confirmed MDR equivalent, left unmapped in the technical file until a notified body identifies the gap, is the direct risk of merging documents without re-verifying every correlation.

What the merge delivered

Closing the identified MDD-to-MDR documentation gap moved the technical file a step closer to full MDR readiness, with the Femoral 3 IFUs now merged into one verified document.

The Real Takeaway

The technical documentation correlation tables are the backbone of an MDR technical file.

Get the cross-reference wrong once and every downstream reviewer inherits the error.

Done reading this sample?

Go back to my Articles page to find topics that might be of interest to you. Let me know if you want me to write about something specific.

Back to article archive