Regulation (EU) 2024/1860 - Its impact on EU MDR and IVDR

Shona Richardson PhD
EU flags

The European Parliament and the Council of the European Union recently amended the EU Medical Device Regulation (MDR) and the EU in vitro Diagnostic Medical Device Regulation (IVDR) with Regulation (EU) 2024/1860.

In this article, we explain how in two key areas these amendments reinforce important elements of the previously published regulatory framework, helping maintain the high quality and safety standards of medical and in vitro diagnostic devices.

1. Gradual roll-out of the European database on medical devices (EUDAMED)

This update requires that the Commission set up, maintain, and manage EUDAMED, a framework comprising seven interconnected electronic systems. EUDAMED aims to provide better transparency and traceability of medical and in vitro diagnostic devices among EU member states. Four systems are complete to date, and two more are expected to be finished in 2024. The European Commission recently updated the EUDAMED roadmap, outlining key roll-out dates.

However, the complexity of clinical investigations and performance studies poses a significant challenge, leading to delays in implementing EUDAMED across member states. As a result, EUDAMED will gradually roll out as individual electronic systems, with each system being implemented after thorough verification by the Commission.

2. Ensuring a smooth transition to the IVDR

The transition from the EU Medical Devices Directive (IVDD) to the IVDR poses a challenge for manufacturers, as shown by comparing conformity assessment applications and certificates issued by Notified Bodies. With the transitional period ending on 26 May 2025, there is a high risk of shortages of critical in vitro diagnostic medical devices, especially high-risk (Class D) devices.

Thus, the transitional period has been extended to prevent device shortages, protect patient health, and mitigate market disruption. This extension aims to provide manufacturers and notified bodies with the time necessary to complete the necessary conformity assessments. As part of this, manufacturers must inform the relevant authorities of any perceived disruptions or discontinuation of medical devices that could harm patients or public health.

Looking ahead

These changes collectively aim to strengthen the regulatory framework for medical and in vitro diagnostic medical devices, improve safety and transparency, prioritise public health and foster medical device innovation.

At Mantra Systems, we are medical device regulatory experts with a track record of successful regulatory submissions. Please contact shona@mantrasystems.com if you have any questions about this article or would like to to find out how we can help you overcome regulatory challenges and gain approval for your device.

Related articles

  1. Collage art showing a pair of binoculars, an analogy for surveillance.

    How EU MDR Post Market Surveillance differs from FDA post-market expectations

    We compare manufacturer-specific post-market obligations across both regulatory systems.

    Dr Gayle Buchel Dr Gayle Buchel Chief Medical Writer
  2. An arrow arcs from the US over to Europe.

    How EU device classification differs from the US - Are you Prepared?

    Did you know an FDA Class II medical device could be immediately considered as a high-risk Class III device under European Union regulations?

    Gabriela Cardoso Gabriela Cardoso Regulatory Medical Writer
  3. A magnifying glass inspecting a number of wooden cubes with question marks upon them laid upon a blue table. The wooden cube under the magnifying glass has a lightbulb painted on it.

    Fixing the MDR and IVDR? The Commission’s Proposed Amendments and What They Mean for Manufacturers

    Exploring the key elements of this proposal.

    Chandini Valiya Kizhakkeveetil Chandini Valiya Kizhakkeveetil Regulatory Medical Writer
  4. Two arms point at a sign and hold a question mark, in an abstract pop-art style.

    Regulatory Reset? The EU’s Proposed Changes to MDR and IVDR Explained

    Changes published in December 2025 aim to streamline EU medical device and in vitro diagnostics. We explain who is impacted and how.

    Dr Gayle Buchel Dr Gayle Buchel Chief Medical Writer
  5. A pair of glasses rests on an eye test chart.

    Did You Know Your Glasses Were a Medical Device? A Regulatory Guide for Manufacturers

    The importance of correct classification and our recommended path to avoid common ophthalmic device 'gotchas'.

    Gabriela Cardoso Gabriela Cardoso Regulatory Medical Writer
  6. A precariously balanced pile of ping-pong balls and wooden bars.

    The Shift from MDD to MDR: Key Differences in Demonstrating Equivalence

    This transition has demanded that device safety must be demonstrated with more evidence. We offer tips for winning equivalence claims.

    Kamiya Crabtree Kamiya Crabtree Regulatory Medical Writer
  7. Holding up the Mantra Systems sign with Shanghai as a backdrop.

    2025: A year in review

    Our CEO takes a seasonal look back at our year in medical device regulation. Plus a peek at some of our offerings planned for 2026.

    Paul Hercock Paul Hercock Chief Executive Officer
  8. A pen and notepad, resting on a laptop.

    Periodic Safety Update Report: Requirements under EU MDR

    Post-Market Surveillance has become more stringent. We help you to understand what manufacturers need to consider.

    Chandini Valiya Kizhakkeveetil Chandini Valiya Kizhakkeveetil Regulatory Medical Writer
  9. An EU flag on a pole flies between two US flags against a blue sky.

    Webinar: From USA to Europe - Accelerating Your Path to the Medical Device Market

    We showed you how to quickly transform your U.S. regulatory work into a compliant EU MDR submission.

    Chandini Valiya Kizhakkeveetil Chandini Valiya Kizhakkeveetil Regulatory Medical Writer
  10. A poster frame for our Clinical Evaluation video series featuring Paul Hercock.

    Guide to Clinical Evaluation: Common Pitfalls & Useful Resources

    Part 5 - In the final video from this series, we explore five major pitfalls that often derail clinical evaluations.

    Paul Hercock Paul Hercock Chief Executive Officer

More articles

Need help producing compliant CEPs & CERs? We are offering FREE CEPs to 5 qualifying applicants per week

Get your free CEP