Pharmaceuticals Supplements Medical Devices
About Us Careers FAQ All Insights
Privacy Policy Terms of Service
Thai FDA Drug Registration Local Authorized Representative (LAR) & Importer of Record (IOR) Dossier Preparation, ACTD Submissions & Thai Labeling GMP Compliance Consulting Post-Approval Lifecycle Management Pharmacovigilance Government Fee Schedule Pharmaceutical Insights
Thai FDA Supplement Registration Local Importer & Orr.7 Import License GMP Requirements for Supplement Manufacturers Labeling & Health Claims Ingredient Approval & Novel Food Advertising Approval & the Kho Or Permit Supplement Insights
Thai FDA Medical Device Registration Device Classification: AMDD Classes 1-4 Local License Holder & Establishment Licensing Technical File & CSDT Preparation Labeling Requirements: B.E. 2568 (2025) Medical Device Insights
Email WhatsApp (+66) 082.208.2460
Email WhatsApp (+66) 082.208.2460

Thailand Medical Device
Technical File & CSDT

A CE technical file and an ASEAN Common Submission Dossier Template (CSDT) are not the same document. They share underlying science but differ in structure, required annexes, and language obligations. Thai FDA screens for CSDT format compliance before review begins. A submission that does not meet format requirements does not advance to expert review regardless of the quality of the underlying technical data.

The ASEAN Common Submission Dossier Template

Thailand's device submission format follows the ASEAN Common Submission Dossier Template (CSDT), the harmonized submission structure used across ASEAN member states under the ASEAN Medical Device Directive (AMDD). The CSDT is the Thai FDA-accepted format for Class 2, 3, and 4 device submissions. Class 1 listing submissions use a simplified document set; the full CSDT applies to notification and license pathway applications.

Technical documentation within the CSDT may be submitted in English. Application forms and Instructions for Use (IFU) for home-use devices must be in Thai. The Thai-language obligation applies to specific documents within the dossier, not to the entire technical file. Manufacturers with existing CE or FDA documentation can submit much of the underlying technical content in English, provided the CSDT structure, headings, and required annexes are met.

The distinction between having the data and having it in the correct CSDT structure is where most reformatted CE submissions fail. Thai FDA does not identify which sections are missing or incorrectly structured and invite the applicant to revise; a non-compliant submission is rejected at screening and must be resubmitted in full.

What the CSDT submission package must contain

The CSDT is organized into defined sections. Each section has specific content requirements. The following represents the core components of a Class 2, 3, or 4 CSDT submission under Thai FDA requirements.

CE marking and 510(k): what they do and do not do in a Thai submission

CE marking under EU MDR and US FDA 510(k) clearance are accepted as supporting evidence in CSDT submissions to Thai FDA. They carry evidentiary weight: they demonstrate that the device has been assessed by a recognized regulatory authority against defined safety and performance standards. They are meaningful inputs to the MDCD's expert review.

They are not substitutes for Thai FDA registration. CE marking does not confer market authorization in Thailand. 510(k) clearance does not. Neither approval shortens the expert review requirement, reduces the CSDT documentation burden, or replaces the classification determination under Thai AMDD criteria. A device that holds CE marking and 510(k) clearance still requires a complete CSDT dossier, a Thai local holder, an establishment license, and a Letter of Authorization.

The practical value of CE and 510(k) documentation in a Thai submission is in the clinical evidence section: a CE clinical evaluation report or an FDA-reviewed clinical dataset provides a structured foundation for the CSDT clinical evidence component. The CE technical file structure itself does not map to CSDT sections and cannot be submitted as-is.

The Thailand-Malaysia bilateral reliance program

As of May 1, 2026, Thailand and Malaysia operate a bilateral medical device reliance program. Under this program, devices already approved by Malaysia's Medical Device Authority (MDA) may bypass the external expert evaluation step at Thai FDA when submitted with a full CSDT dossier.

The program applies to Classes 2, 3, and 4 under Thai FDA classification (equivalent to MDA Classes B, C, and D). Class 1 devices are excluded. The applicant must hold a current, valid MDA approval and submit a complete CSDT dossier to the MDCD; the reliance applies specifically to the external expert evaluation step, not to the entire review process.

The program was established following a confidentiality agreement signed on December 4, 2025 at the 29th GHWP Annual Meeting in Bangkok, preceded by a pilot program running from February 1 to April 30, 2026. It is currently the only confirmed bilateral reliance pathway between Thai FDA and another major regulatory authority for medical devices. No equivalent program exists with the US FDA, the EU, or other ASEAN markets as of the date of this content.

For manufacturers with an existing Malaysian MDA approval, this program represents a meaningful reduction in the Thai expert review burden. For manufacturers without MDA approval, the program is not directly applicable; CE marking and 510(k) clearance remain supporting evidence only, not reliance triggers.

Post-approval obligations

Thai FDA device registration is not a one-time submission. Approved registrations carry ongoing compliance obligations that fall on the Thai local license holder and, through the holder, on the foreign manufacturer. These obligations begin from the date of registration approval and continue for the lifecycle of the product on the Thai market.

The Vero Approach

We prepare CSDT dossiers to Thai FDA format requirements, not to CE technical file structure. Before assembly begins, we conduct a gap analysis between the manufacturer's existing documentation and what the MDCD requires in each CSDT section. Gaps identified before filing are documentation work. Gaps identified after a rejection are timeline loss.

For manufacturers with existing MDA approval, we assess eligibility for the Thailand-Malaysia bilateral reliance pathway and structure the CSDT submission accordingly. For manufacturers without MDA approval, we identify which existing international documentation can serve as supporting evidence and what additional work is required to meet Thai FDA's clinical evidence expectations for the relevant device class.

Post-approval compliance is managed as part of our ongoing license holder service. Renewal, variations, and adverse event reporting obligations do not fall through the gap between registration approval and the next interaction with Thai FDA.