Skip to content

FDA on pace for a Record Number of Breakthrough Devices in 2023


The FDA implemented the breakthrough device program in 2015.  The program was designed to expedite review of premarket approval (PMA), 510(k) clearance, and De Novo marketing authorizations. Applicants can seek a breakthrough device designation prior to requesting market approval regardless of the classification of the device.  In order to qualify as a breakthrough device, the device must (1) provide for a more effective treatment or diagnosis of a life-threatening or irreversibly debilitating disease or condition and (2) meet at least one of: (a) represents a breakthrough technology; (b) no approved or cleared alternatives exist, (c) offers significant advantages over existing approved or cleared alternatives, or (d) device availability is in the best interest of patients.

During the first year of breakthrough device program in 2015, the FDA granted only 11 breakthrough device designations. That number grew each year, peaking in 2021 with 206 designations. In 2022, the number of breakthrough device designations fell to 166, causing some to advocate for changes to the program. However, based on the most recent data from March 31, 2023, the FDA is on pace to grant expedited review to more than 250 devices in 2023.  This would be an all time high.

The chart below illustrates the number of breakthrough device designations from 2015 through 2022, and extrapolates FDA’s pace of breakthrough device designations from the first quarter of 2023 through a full year.

The increase of breakthrough device designations has allowed more products to get to the commercial market in a shorter amount of time.  Under the breakthrough device program, the average time for review of a 510(k) clearance decreased by more than 50%, down from 270 days to 155 days. Similarly, the breakthrough device program has decreased time to grant for a De Novo marketing authorization by 68 days, a decrease of more than 25%.

The decrease in time-to-approval under the breakthrough device program has sparked debate about the safety of approved breakthrough devices and benefit of the breakthrough device program. Patient-safety advocates argue that “with the breakthrough designation, the standard for evidence behind these devices has lessened.” Others maintain that the risk is justified and argue that patients are also harmed by delays in the approval process. Harvard Bioethics Professor Jonathan Darrow remains on the fence, suggesting that more post-market evidence of breakthrough devices is needed before the program can be properly assessed.

With the FDA continuing to grant larger numbers of breakthrough device designations, the breakthrough device designation may prove to be a worthwhile and cost-effective option for medical device companies that are seeking to reach the market faster with a device that meets the qualifications for the program.




, , , , ,

FDA on pace for a Record Number of Breakthrough Devices in 2023 Headshot

Zachary Messick

Zachary Messick’s practice focuses on patent prosecution and portfolio management, due diligence, and patent litigation. Zach currently assists clients in various fields of technology including medical devices, biotechnology, and software.

Zach received his J.D. from the University of Georgia School of Law where he was a member of the Journal of Intellectual Property Law. Before law school Zach attended Clemson University where he received a Bachelor of Science in Bioengineering.

View all posts published by Zachary Messick
By using this blog, you agree and understand that no information is being provided in the context of any attorney-client relationship. You further agree and understand that nothing herein is intended to be legal advice. This blog is solely informational in nature, and is not intended as, and should not be used as, a substitute for competent legal advice from a retained and licensed attorney in your state. Knobbe Martens LLP makes no representations or warranties as to the accuracy, completeness, timeliness or availability of the information in this blog. Knobbe Martens LLP will not be liable for any injury or damages relating to your use of, or access to, any such information. Knobbe Martens LLP undertakes no obligation to correct or update information on this blog, which may be incorrect or become incorrect or out of date over time. Knobbe Martens LLP reserves the right to alter or delete content or information on the blog at any time. This blog contains links and references to other websites and publications that you may find of interest. Knobbe Martens LLP does not control, promote, endorse or otherwise have any affiliation with any other websites or publications unless those websites or publications expressly state such an affiliation. Knobbe Martens LLP further has no responsibility for, and makes no representations regarding, the content, accuracy or any other aspect of the information in such websites or publications.
close modal