When FDA Trust Is Broken: Lessons from the MedLink Scandal

Ariana Wilson and Mark Drlik seated against a white background, wearing lavalier microphones. The woman on the left has long brown curly hair and is wearing a beige cardigan over a taupe top. The man on the right is wearing glasses and a blue button-up shirt. They appear to be engaged in conversation or a video interview.
Resources

When FDA Trust Is Broken: Lessons from the MedLink Scandal

Sector: Diagnostics

A recent FDA announcement has sent shockwaves through the MedTech community: MedLink, a third-party test house, was found falsifying test data. The consequences? All pending FDA submissions that relied on MedLink’s data have been rejected, delaying or derailing device approvals and costing companies precious time and trust.

In this episode of MedDevice by Design, Ariana Wilson and Mark Drlik examine what happened, what it means for medical device innovators, and how the FDA’s ASCA (Accreditation Scheme for Conformity Assessment) program helps reduce regulatory risk.

The FDA discovered that MedLink had falsified testing data, compromising the integrity of submissions relying on that information. As a result, those submissions are now invalid, and the affected companies must retest their devices and resubmit, costing them months of delay and significant financial loss.

Why ASCA Accreditation Matters

To prevent this kind of disruption, the FDA established the ASCA program in 2020. Labs that receive ASCA accreditation are thoroughly vetted, giving the FDA and submitting companies greater confidence in their test results. Submissions that include ASCA-accredited data benefit from reduced review times—sometimes shaving weeks or even months off approval timelines.

The Tradeoff: Fewer Labs, Higher Costs

As of late 2024, only 47 test houses hold ASCA accreditation, limiting access for some companies. Additionally, ASCA-accredited testing can be 10% to 30% more expensive than non-accredited alternatives. Still, that investment offers peace of mind and regulatory security—especially when the risk of working with an unreliable lab is so high.

Key Takeaway: Prioritize Risk Management


This episode is a reminder of the critical role third-party labs play in the regulatory process. Choosing an ASCA-accredited lab is not just about speed; it’s about reducing risk, protecting your investment, and ensuring trust in your data.

Learn more about StarFish Medical.

A healthcare professional in a sterile gown and gloves holds an endoscope, with a red arrow pointing toward the device. Beside it, a handheld cleaning brush is shown, symbolizing the manual cleaning process. Text overlay reads “Not sterile. Just safe?”

Understanding Endoscope Reprocessing

Ariana and Mark examine the complexities of endoscope reprocessing, one of the most difficult tasks in medical device hygiene.

Sterilizing medical devices using various FDA-approved methods - Image showing three medical-related items—a pulse oximeter, surgical scissors, and a catheter with a Luer lock—on a light background. A bold label at the top reads ‘How to sterilize?’ with an arrow pointing to the pulse oximeter, indicating a question about sterilization methods for these devices.

Medical Device Sterilization Methods Explained

Ariana and Mark walk through FDA-approved options and explain how to select the right one for your product. From metals to plastics and electronics, not all devices can handle the same process.

X-ray image showing two human knees side-by-side. The right knee appears intact with natural bone structure, while the left knee has a visible knee replacement implant, including metallic components. A bold caption in the upper center reads "Bone or not?" and a red curved arrow points from the text to the knee with the implant, emphasizing the contrast between natural bone and artificial joint.

Osseointegration Implants: How They Work and Why They Matter

In this episode of MedDevice by Design, Ariana and Mark dive into the biomechanics and materials science behind osseointegration for implants.

Split image showing two close-up views of a human eye. On the left, the eye is seen through thick black-framed glasses, indicating impaired vision. On the right, the same eye is enhanced with a futuristic digital overlay of concentric circles and interface elements, suggesting advanced vision restoration technology. A red curved arrow points from left to right, implying improvement. Bold text at the top reads "Restoring Vision?"

Accommodative Intraocular Lens Technology Explained

Ariana and Mark explore how accommodative intraocular lens technology may one day restore natural vision for people who require cataract surgery or suffer from presbyopia. As Mark shares, traditional bifocals are not ideal, and new lens solutions may offer better outcomes.