LinkedInXFacebook
Subscribe
Orthopedics This Week
  • My Feed
  • |Posts
  • |Events
  • |MSK Innovations
  • |Power Rankings
  • |Masterclasses
  • |Technology Awards
  • Press Releases
  • |Advertising
  • |Job Board
  • Spine
  • ◆Joints
  • ◆Upper Extremities
  • ◆Foot & Ankle
  • ◆Sports Medicine
  • ◆Pain Mgmt
  • ◆Trauma
  • ◆Biologics
  • ◆Technology
  • ◆People
  • ◆Company News
  • ◆Legal & Regulatory
Home/Legal & Regulatory and Reimbursement/CMS Stops Auto Payment Coverage for FDA Breakthrough Devices
Legal & Regulatory and Reimbursement

CMS Stops Auto Payment Coverage for FDA Breakthrough Devices

November 19, 2021 2 min read Premium comments

Advertisement

#fda#cms#breakthroughdevice

It was good while it lasted.

Since 2018, nearly 300 medical devices have received FDA breakthrough designation. The designation was a big deal. In addition to getting a smoother path to FDA approvals or clearances, the designation brought automatic expedited Centers for Medicare and Medicaid (CMS) coverage for up to four years.

That automatic CMS coverage is now over. The magical moment of harmonic convergence between CMS and the FDA has vanished like Cinderella’s coach at midnight.

Not “Reasonable and Necessary”

On November 12, 2021, CMS made good on its previously announced intention to rescind the automatic coverage rule. As we reported in early October, the agency was concerned that automatic coverage didn’t meet its own definition of “Reasonable and Necessary.”

Breakthrough devices, “may have unknown or unexpected risks and must first ensure such technologies improve health outcomes for Medicare beneficiaries…the kinds of clinical studies needed for FDA market authorization might not consider the differences in clinical profiles, complexities of medical conditions, or associated treatments of the diverse population of Medicare patients,” stated the CMS announcement.

Alternate Paths to Coverage

Likely anticipating significant disappointment with this about face, CMS said there remains “existing and proven pathways” that allow for coverage of a specific medical device or service. “Devices may still be covered through claim-by-claim determinations, under one or more local coverage determinations, or a national coverage determination.”

Advertisement

The agency said it plans to work with the FDA, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), medical device manufacturers, and other stakeholders “to develop an expeditious process to cover innovative devices that benefit Medicare patients,” and intends to hold at least two stakeholder public meetings in the next year “to inform future policy-making in this space.”

Breakthrough Device Benefits

It’s worth noting that gaining the FDA’s breakthrough designation still brings significant benefits, including speeding up product development and FDA assessment and review, for premarket approval, 510(k) clearance, and De Novo marketing authorization.

The designation offers manufacturers an opportunity to interact with the FDA’s experts through several different program options to “efficiently address topics as they arise during the premarket review phase, which can help manufacturers receive feedback from the FDA and identify areas of agreement in a timely way,” according to the FDA. Manufacturers can also expect prioritized review of their submission.

In a note to investors on November 12, Needham & Company, LLC’s Senior Research Analyst Mike Matson wrote the rescission of automatic Medicare coverage is a “modest negative” for the medical device industry.

You can learn more about gaining breakthrough designation from the FDA.

React:

Discussion

14
DS
Dr. Sarah MitchellOrthopedic Surgeon · Mayo Clinic

This is a fascinating development. In my practice we've seen similar outcomes with the revised protocol. The key differentiator seems to be patient selection criteria. Has anyone else noticed the correlation with BMI thresholds?

8
JT
James Thornton, MDSpine Fellow · HSS

Great point. I'd push back slightly on the conclusion, the sample size in the cited study is too small to draw population-level inferences. That said, the directional signal is compelling and worth a larger RCT.

5
RP
R. PatelSports Medicine · Stanford

We implemented a similar approach last year. Early results are promising but we're still gathering 12-month follow-up data. Happy to share our protocol if anyone is interested.

Join the conversation

Orthopedic professionals are discussing this. Sign in and upgrade to read every comment and add your voice.

Subscribe

Get Full Access

Read every OTW article and join member discussions for $24.99/month.

Get Full Access

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement

Orthopedics This Week

The most trusted source in orthopedic industry news since 2005. Covering spine, joints, trauma, biologics, and the business of orthopedics.

A publication of RRY Publications, LLC

LinkedInXFacebook

Categories

  • Spine
  • Joints
  • Upper Extremities
  • Foot & Ankle
  • Sports Medicine
  • Pain Mgmt
  • Trauma
  • Biologics
  • Technology
  • People
  • Company News
  • Legal & Regulatory

Resources

  • Subscribe
  • Community Posts
  • Job Board
  • Press Release Opportunities
  • Power Rankings
  • About OTW
  • Advertise
  • Contact Us

Get Full Access

Unlimited articles, community posts, and Power Rankings.

Get Full Access

Plans start at $24.99/mo · Annual saves 20%

© 2026 Orthopedics This Week · RRY Publications, LLC

Privacy PolicyTerms of ServiceCookie Policy