Artifact GuideEU

EU MDR Post-Market Surveillance and Vigilance

Under Regulation (EU) 2017/745, is not a complaint inbox. For each device, the manufacturer must run a documented PMS system that gathers, records, and analyses quality, performance, and safety data across the device lifetime.

This page helps structure PMS plans, PMS reports or PSURs, PMCF updates, vigilance decisions, trend reporting, EUDAMED submissions, and the records reviewers will ask to see.

Author
Sorena AI
Published
May 9, 2026
Updated
Oct 15, 2026
Overview

EU MDR and vigilance should connect field data to technical documentation, clinical evaluation, risk management, corrective action, and authority reporting. Keep a traceable record of the signal received, its assessment, the MDR route applied, each report or update, and the evidence retained in the technical file.

Section 1

Build the PMS system around device-specific signals

Article 83 requires a system for each device that is proportionate to risk class and appropriate for the device type. The system belongs inside the manufacturer's quality management system, so support tickets, complaint handling, service records, distributor feedback, literature review, registry data, and clinical follow-up should feed the same controlled process.

MDR PMS data does more than populate a log. It is used to update benefit-risk determination, risk management, design and manufacturing information, instructions for use, labelling, clinical evaluation, the summary of safety and clinical performance where relevant, and needs for preventive, corrective, or .

MDCG 2025-10 describes PMS as a continuous cycle that begins when the first device is placed on the market or put into service and continues through the intended lifetime of the last device covered by the plan. One plan may cover a device group, but it must identify every device in scope and justify monitoring methods and frequencies against the risk profile.

  • Define PMS intake sources by device, version, intended purpose, risk class, market, and responsible owner.
  • Classify each signal as complaint, non-serious incident, serious incident candidate, expected side-effect, trend signal, PMCF input, CAPA input, or non-device issue.
  • Link each PMS conclusion to the records it may update: risk file, clinical evaluation report, PMCF plan or report, IFU, labelling, SSCP, technical documentation, PMS report, or .
  • When PMS identifies preventive or corrective action, document the measure, authority or notified-body communication if applicable, and post-action monitoring.
Section 2

Keep the PMS plan, PMS report, and PSUR distinct

The PMS plan is the operating design for collecting and analysing post-market data. Article 84 points to Annex III and requires the plan to be part of technical documentation for devices other than custom-made devices.

The report type depends on class. Class I manufacturers prepare a PMS report summarising analysis results, conclusions, and the rationale and description for preventive and corrective actions. Class IIa, IIb, and III manufacturers prepare a for each device, or where relevant each category or group of devices, with conclusions from benefit-risk determination, main PMCF findings, sales volume, user population estimates, and usage frequency where practicable.

  • For class I, keep the PMS report current when necessary and available for competent-authority request.
  • For class IIa, update the when necessary and at least every two years.
  • For class IIb and class III, update the at least annually.
  • For class III and implantable devices, Article 86 requires submission through the Article 92 electronic system once the relevant EUDAMED workflow is operative. Until then, follow national provisions and the submission method agreed with the notified body; keep its evaluation with the record.
  • For other devices, keep the PSUR available to the notified body involved in conformity assessment and, upon request, to competent authorities.
Section 3

Use PMCF to update clinical evaluation and risk management

PMCF is part of PMS, but it has a clinical evidence job. MDR Annex XIV treats PMCF as a continuous process that updates clinical evaluation and requires a documented PMCF plan. MDCG 2020-7 gives a practical structure for the plan: manufacturer and device details, PMCF activities, links to technical documentation, clinical evaluation and risk management references, equivalent or similar device data, standards or guidance, and the estimated date of the PMCF evaluation report.

A usable PMCF record explains why each activity is needed, what data quality is expected, which endpoints or questions are being answered, what limitations exist, when analysis and reporting will happen, and how findings flow back into the clinical evaluation report, technical documentation, and risk controls.

  • Include general methods such as clinical experience, user feedback, scientific literature, and other clinical data sources.
  • Use specific methods where justified, such as registries, PMCF studies, real-world evidence analyses, healthcare professional surveys, patient or user surveys, and case report review.
  • State the PMCF objective: confirming safety and performance, monitoring side-effects and contraindications, detecting emerging risks, confirming benefit-risk acceptability, or identifying systematic misuse or off-label use.
  • Document PMCF findings in a PMCF evaluation report and use the conclusions to update clinical evaluation and risk management; implement preventive or corrective measures when PMCF identifies the need.
Section 4

Separate serious incident, FSCA, and trend decisions

Vigilance starts with triage. Article 87 requires manufacturers to report serious incidents involving devices made available on the Union market, except expected side-effects that are clearly documented, quantified in technical documentation, and subject to trend reporting. The same article covers field safety corrective actions, including third-country FSCAs for a device also legally made available on the Union market when the reason is not limited to the third-country device.

Trend reporting is a different route. Article 88 covers statistically significant increases in the frequency or severity of non-serious incidents or expected undesirable side-effects that could significantly affect benefit-risk analysis and may create unacceptable health or safety risks. The PMS plan should specify the methodology, observation period, and handling approach for those trend signals.

  • For each event, record awareness date, device identification, market, seriousness assessment, causality assessment, expected side-effect status, trend threshold check, and reporting route.
  • Report a serious incident immediately once the causal relationship is established or reasonably possible, and no later than 15 days after awareness. For death or unanticipated serious deterioration, report immediately once causality is established or suspected and no later than 10 days after awareness. Report a serious public health threat immediately and no later than 2 days after awareness.
  • For FSCAs, record the field safety notice, affected UDI or device identifiers, SRN if issued, user actions, competent-authority review where applicable, and evidence that users were informed without delay.
  • After a serious incident report, keep investigation records, risk assessment, final report, corrective action decision, and communications with competent authorities and the notified body where relevant.
Section 5

Use current reporting routes and prepare for EUDAMED

MDR Article 92 establishes the electronic system for vigilance and PMS information, including serious incident and FSCA reports, periodic summary reports, trend reports, PSURs, field safety notices, and competent-authority exchanges. The Actor, UDI/Device, Notified Bodies and Certificates, and Market Surveillance modules became mandatory on 28 May 2026, but the Commission still lists the Vigilance and module as in development. Manufacturers and authorised representatives must therefore continue using the applicable national processes for vigilance and PMS submissions.

MDCG 2024-11 says there is no voluntary-use period for the Vigilance and module. When it becomes mandatory, subsequent actions on still-open national reports move into EUDAMED, but the original report is not entered retrospectively. Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/2078 supplies malfunction rules once an operative EUDAMED submission is required.

  • Until the module becomes mandatory, keep national submission records, authority correspondence, notified-body delivery records where applicable, and the identifiers needed to continue open follow-up actions in EUDAMED later.
  • After the module becomes mandatory, keep EUDAMED receipts and submission identifiers with the related case. Maintain a fallback communication log if a malfunction affects a required submission: who was informed, what data was provided, which authority-prescribed channel was used, and when the EUDAMED entry was completed.
  • Do not rely on EUDAMED module status as a reason to skip internal MDR records; keep the PMS, PMCF, risk, clinical, and vigilance evidence controlled in the technical documentation and QMS.
Recommended next step

Review MDR PMS and vigilance evidence

Check that the PMS plan, PMCF plan, PSUR or PMS report, vigilance triage, FSCA process, trend method, and EUDAMED records remain consistent for the same device and version.

Section 6

Evidence records to keep together

A reviewer should be able to reconstruct the full chain from signal to decision. Keep records at device and version level, and preserve links between PMS analysis, clinical evaluation, risk management, PMCF, vigilance reports, field safety actions, CAPA, notified-body review, and EUDAMED submission evidence.

Record the MDR article route, device scope, data source, method, assessment, decision, report or update made, authority communication, and follow-up monitoring. Link each reporting deadline to the applicable legal trigger.

  • PMS plan, data-source map, statistical methods for trend detection, observation periods, and escalation criteria.
  • PMS report or with benefit-risk conclusions, PMCF findings, sales or use estimates where required, preventive and corrective actions, and update history.
  • PMCF plan, activity protocols, data-quality rationale, PMCF evaluation report, clinical evaluation updates, and risk-management updates.
  • Vigilance triage records, serious incident reports, FSCA decisions, field safety notices, final investigation reports, periodic summary reporting agreements if used, and competent-authority or notified-body correspondence.
  • National submission and notified-body delivery records while the VGL module is unavailable; after mandatory use begins, EUDAMED receipts, transition records for open cases, malfunction communications, and evidence that users received field safety notices when applicable.
Primary sources

References and citations

eur-lex.europa.eu7 citations
Referenced sections
  • Primary MDR source for PMS system and plan, PMS report, PSUR, serious incident and FSCA reporting, trend reporting, Article 92 electronic system, and Annex XIV PMCF requirements.
  • Articles 83 and 84 require a device-specific PMS system and PMS plan, and identify how PMS data updates risk management, clinical evaluation, labelling, technical documentation, and corrective action.
  • Articles 84, 85, and 86 define the PMS plan, PMS report, PSUR content, update cadence, and submission or availability routes by device class.
Show 4 more
  • Annex XIV Part B requires PMCF to update clinical evaluation, specifies minimum PMCF plan content, and requires PMCF findings to be documented and fed back into clinical evaluation and risk management.
  • Articles 87 to 89 define reportable serious incidents, FSCAs, expected side-effect exceptions, vigilance reporting clocks, trend reporting, investigations, final reports, and field safety notices.
  • Article 92 identifies the PMS and vigilance information handled by the electronic system, including serious incident reports, FSCAs, trend reports, PSURs, field safety notices, and competent-authority exchanges.
  • Articles 83 to 92 and Annex XIV support the required record chain across PMS, PMCF, PSURs, vigilance, trend reporting, corrective actions, technical documentation, and EUDAMED submissions.
"Post-market surveillance system of the manufacturer"
More quoted passages
"plan, establish, document, implement, maintain and update"
"Periodic safety update report"
"PMCF shall be performed pursuant to a documented method"
"any serious incident involving devices"
"Electronic system on vigilance and on post-market surveillance"
"The technical documentation shall be updated accordingly."
health.ec.europa.eu3 citations
Referenced sections
  • MDCG guidance source for PMCF plan structure, PMCF activity examples, objectives, rationale, timelines, and links to clinical evaluation, risk management, technical documentation, and PMCF evaluation reports.
  • MDCG 2020-7 provides a non-binding PMCF plan template and examples of PMCF activities, objectives, rationale, limitations, timelines, and evaluation-report planning.
  • Supports practical PMCF evidence fields, including activity source, description, objectives, methods, rationale, timelines, and PMCF evaluation-report planning.
"Post-market clinical follow-up (PMCF) Plan Template"
More quoted passages
"The PMCF plan shall be part of the post-market surveillance plan."
"Activities related to PMCF"
eur-lex.europa.eu2 citations
Referenced sections
  • Binding EUDAMED operating source for access, user support, data exchange, and malfunction contingency records when technical unavailability affects submissions.
  • Sets rules for EUDAMED access, technical support, machine-to-machine services, and contingency handling when malfunctions hinder required submissions.
"laying down rules for the application"
More quoted passages
"technical and administrative assistance on Eudamed"
webgate.ec.europa.eu2 citations
Referenced sections
  • Official EUDAMED production portal and information-centre source used for submission-channel and operational evidence references.
  • European Commission portal for the EUDAMED production system and information centre used to support operational submission evidence.
"EUDAMED is the IT system"
health.ec.europa.eu2 citations
Referenced sections
  • Current transition source for national vigilance processes and later continuation of open reports in EUDAMED.
  • Current guidance for the unavailable VGL module, continued national processes, and the later handling of reports that remain open when the module becomes mandatory.
"The VGL module is not available for voluntary use"
More quoted passages
"This does not imply retrospective registration"
health.ec.europa.eu2 citations
Referenced sections
  • Current MDCG guidance for PMS system operation, continuous lifecycle coverage, PMS plan scope, proactive collection, and QMS feedback.
  • Current non-binding MDCG guidance on PMS lifecycle, plan scope, grouping, proactive collection, method rationale, QMS interfaces, and management review.
"Each device must be covered by a PMS plan"
More quoted passages
"PMS is a continuous process"
health.ec.europa.eu
Referenced sections
  • Confirms that four EUDAMED modules became mandatory on 28 May 2026 and that the Vigilance and Post-Market Surveillance module remains under development.
Show all related guides (46)

EU MDR classification workflow

A concrete EU MDR classification workflow for intended purpose, device or accessory qualification, Annex VIII rule selection, Rule 11 software review, class outcome, and notified body impact.

EU MDR Clinical Evaluation Overview

EU MDR clinical evaluation overview covering Article 61, Annex XIV, clinical data sources, equivalence, PMCF, CER evidence, notified body review, GSPR, and benefit-risk support.

EU MDR Clinical Evaluation Report Template

A cited EU MDR clinical evaluation report template covering intended purpose, GSPR linkage, clinical data appraisal, equivalence limits, PMCF, conclusions, and reviewer signoff.

EU MDR clinical evidence guide

EU MDR guide to clinical evaluation, clinical investigations, equivalence, PMCF, GSPR support, technical documentation, and notified-body review.

EU MDR compliance obligations

EU MDR compliance guide for device qualification, classification, conformity assessment, QMS, technical documentation, UDI, EUDAMED, PMS, vigilance, and legacy transition controls.

EU MDR conformity route workflow

EU MDR workflow for classifying a device, choosing the conformity assessment route, preparing technical and QMS evidence, and reaching certificate, DoC, UDI, EUDAMED, and CE outputs.

EU MDR deadlines and compliance calendar

EU MDR calendar for application, conditional legacy-device transition, UDI carrier dates, mandatory EUDAMED modules, and recurring compliance reviews.

EU MDR Device Classification Guide

Classify an EU MDR medical device by intended purpose, Annex VIII duration, invasiveness, active-device and software rules, then document the conformity route impact.

EU MDR EUDAMED and UDI registration

MDR guide to Basic UDI-DI, UDI-DI, EUDAMED device registration, actor roles, labels, technical documentation, and UDI data governance.

EU MDR FAQ: qualification, evidence, UDI, and transition

Concise EU MDR FAQ covering device qualification, software classification, accessories, custom-made devices, clinical evidence, UDI, EUDAMED, notified bodies, significant changes, and legacy transition.

EU MDR Legacy Device Transition

EU MDR legacy-device guide to Article 120 eligibility, class-based end dates, certificate validity, significant changes, surveillance, and evidence.

EU MDR notified body route selection

Choose an EU MDR conformity assessment route by device class, Article 52 option, notified body designation scope, QMS readiness, technical documentation, clinical evidence, and certificate evidence.

EU MDR penalties and enforcement risk

EU MDR guide to Article 113 national penalties, authority measures, recalls, certificate action, and the evidence needed for a country-specific assessment.

EU MDR PMS and Vigilance Guide

EU MDR guide to post-market surveillance, PMCF updates, PMS reports, PSURs, serious incident reporting, FSCA/FSN handling, trend reporting, and evidence records.

EU MDR PMS Plan Template for Medical Devices

A cited EU MDR post-market surveillance plan template covering device scope, PMS data sources, PMCF linkage, vigilance, trend reporting, PMSR or PSUR outputs, roles, cadence, and evidence records.

EU MDR QMS and technical file evidence map

Map EU MDR Article 10 QMS duties to Annex II and Annex III technical documentation, PMS, vigilance, UDI records, and notified-body review evidence.

EU MDR QMS requirements under Article 10

EU MDR QMS guide for Article 10 manufacturer controls covering regulatory strategy, design, risk, clinical evaluation, PMS, vigilance, UDI, suppliers, CAPA, and conformity records.

EU MDR qualification and borderline products

EU MDR qualification guide for medical purpose claims, accessories, software, Annex XVI products, and borderline routes to classification and conformity assessment.

EU MDR qualification workflow

A concrete EU MDR workflow for deciding whether a product is a medical device, accessory, Annex XVI product, IVD interface, medicinal-product interface, or non-MDR product before classification and conformity assessment.

EU MDR requirements checklist

Concrete EU MDR requirements for medical-device scope, classification, GSPR, conformity assessment, technical documentation, QMS, clinical evidence, UDI, EUDAMED, PMS, vigilance, and economic-operator records.

EU MDR Rule 11 software classification

Classify MDR medical device software under Rule 11 using intended purpose, diagnosis or therapy decision impact, physiological monitoring, conformity route, clinical evidence, and software-change records.

EU MDR transition timeline and end dates

EU MDR chronology for 2021 application, 2023 amendments, 2024 eligibility milestones, and conditional 2026, 2027, and 2028 transition endpoints.

EU MDR UDI and EUDAMED registration guide

EU MDR guide to Basic UDI-DI, UDI-DI, UDI carriers, EUDAMED actor and device registration, change impacts, and evidence governance.

EU MDR vigilance reporting workflow

Concrete EU MDR vigilance workflow for incident intake, serious incident assessment, FSCA and FSN handling, trend reporting, EUDAMED caveats, CAPA, PMS, clinical evaluation updates, and records.

MDR vs AI Act for medical-device software

Compare MDR and AI Act scope, high-risk classification, conformity assessment, evidence, monitoring, and timing for AI-enabled medical devices.

MDR vs EU Product Liability Directive

Compare MDR compliance evidence with EU product-liability claims, responsible parties, disclosure, presumptions, damage, and the December 2026 transition.

MDR vs GPSR: medical-device boundary checks

Compare MDR medical-device scope with general product-safety fallback questions for borderline, non-medical, and Annex XVI products.

MDR vs IVDR: medical devices and IVDs compared

Compare EU MDR and IVDR scope, classification, conformity routes, technical documentation, clinical or performance evidence, UDI, EUDAMED, PMS, and vigilance.

Custom-made medical devices under the EU MDR | EU MDR FAQ

Concise EU MDR FAQ on custom-made device definition, mass-produced exclusions, Annex XIII statements, documentation, conformity assessment, PMS, vigilance, and records to retain.

EU MDR significant changes FAQ: legacy-device transition and notified-body review

FAQ on MDR significant changes for legacy devices, including intended-purpose, design, software, material, sterilisation, clinical, QMS, notified-body, and evidence impacts.

EU MDR SSCP: Devices and Requirements

Decide whether an EU medical device needs an SSCP, see worked class IIa, IIb, and III examples, and check the required content, evidence, publication, and update controls.

How should Basic UDI-DI and UDI-DI be assigned under the EU MDR? | EU MDR FAQ

EU MDR FAQ on Basic UDI-DI grouping, device and package UDI-DIs, UDI carriers, EUDAMED registration, change triggers, and required records.

What should an EU MDR PMCF plan and report cover? | EU MDR FAQ

Under the EU MDR, PMCF is part of PMS and clinical evaluation. See what the plan, activities, report, updates, and retained evidence should cover.

What should manufacturers do when an EU MDR classification changes? | EU MDR FAQ

Concise EU MDR FAQ on classification changes, intended purpose, software, notified-body route impact, certificates, technical documentation, and retained evidence.

When can clinical equivalence be used under the EU MDR?

EU MDR FAQ on clinical equivalence, including technical, biological, and clinical characteristics, access to equivalent-device data, class III and implantable-device limits, clinical evaluation, PMCF, and retained evidence.

When do software or products make medical purpose claims under the EU MDR? | EU MDR FAQ

EU MDR FAQ on medical purpose claims, intended purpose evidence, software qualification, Annex XVI contrasts, and records to keep.

When is a PSUR required under the EU MDR and what should it contain? | EU MDR FAQ

EU MDR FAQ on PSUR scope, content, update cadence, PMS and PMCF links, notified-body handling, EUDAMED submission, and evidence to retain.

When is an accessory regulated under the EU MDR? | EU MDR FAQ

EU MDR FAQ on when an article is a medical device accessory, how intended purpose affects classification, and what evidence to keep.

When is software a medical device under the EU MDR?

EU MDR FAQ on medical device software qualification, Rule 11 and other classification rules, modules, evidence, software changes, UDI, and EUDAMED.

Which EUDAMED modules matter under the EU MDR? | EU MDR FAQ

EU MDR FAQ mapping EUDAMED modules to actor registration, UDI/device data, certificates, clinical investigations, vigilance/PMS, market surveillance, and practical records.