FDA 510(k) Consultants – Regulatory Consulting Firms Directory
Regulatory consulting firms identified across 5,975 FDA 510(k) submissions where per-record enrichment was available, ranked by submission volume. Data extracted from the correspondent field of individual 510(k) records on FDA accessdata.gov - this field is not included in the FDA bulk downloadable files and requires per-record extraction.
This is not a curated listing or marketing directory. It is a data-driven ranking of FDA 510(k) regulatory consulting activity based on real submission records from FDA accessdata.gov, enabling objective comparison of consulting firm involvement in medical device clearances.
- Compare regulatory consulting firms by FDA 510(k) submission activity
- Identify experienced 510(k) consultants by real clearance data
- Filter by FDA review panel and medical device specialty
Used by regulatory affairs teams and medical device manufacturers to benchmark FDA 510(k) submission activity and consultant involvement.
Methodology: A regulatory consultant is identified when the correspondent field of a 510(k) submission differs from the applicant (device manufacturer). This covers regulatory affairs firms, contract regulatory organizations (CROs), and authorized representatives. Only firms with 3 or more submissions are listed. Some entries may represent authorized representatives rather than independent consulting firms.
This dataset is widely used to benchmark regulatory consulting activity in the medical device industry.
Data last updated: May 25, 2026
Most Active FDA 510(k) Regulatory Consulting Firms
383 firms identified across 510(k) submissions managed on behalf of medical device manufacturers. Ranked by total submission volume. · Updated May 2026.
| # | Firm | Submissions | Cleared | Active panels | Active since |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 228 | 100% | 2021 -2026 | ||
| 2 | 222 | 100% | 2020 -2026 | ||
| 3 | 199 | 100% | 2021 -2026 | ||
| 4 | 131 | 100% | 2021 -2026 | ||
| 5 | 114 | 100% | 2021 -2026 | ||
| 6 | 113 | 100% | 2021 -2026 | ||
| 7 | 108 | 100% | 2021 -2024 | ||
| 8 | 108 | 100% | 2021 -2024 | ||
| 9 | 91 | 100% | 2021 -2026 | ||
| 10 | 77 | 100% | 2021 -2026 | ||
| 11 | 76 | 100% | 2021 -2026 | ||
| 12 | 74 | 100% | 2021 -2026 | ||
| 13 | 73 | 100% | 2021 -2026 | ||
| 14 | 69 | 100% | 2021 -2026 | ||
| 15 | 69 | 100% | 2022 -2026 | ||
| 16 | 61 | 100% | 2015 -2026 | ||
| 17 | 54 | 100% | 2021 -2026 | ||
| 18 | 50 | 100% | 2021 -2026 | ||
| 19 | 48 | 100% | 2022 -2026 | ||
| 20 | 48 | 100% | 2021 -2026 | ||
| 21 | 41 | 100% | 2021 -2025 | ||
| 22 | 39 | 100% | 2021 -2026 | ||
| 23 | 39 | 100% | 2021 -2026 | ||
| 24 | 35 | 100% | 2021 -2025 | ||
| 25 | 35 | 100% | 2021 -2026 | ||
| 26 | 34 | 100% | 2021 -2023 | ||
| 27 | 33 | 100% | 2021 -2026 | ||
| 28 | 33 | 100% | 2021 -2026 | ||
| 29 | 32 | 100% | 2021 -2026 | ||
| 30 | 32 | 100% | 2022 -2025 | ||
| 31 | 31 | 100% | 2021 -2026 | ||
| 32 | 30 | 100% | 2021 -2026 | ||
| 33 | 30 | 100% | 2021 -2025 | ||
| 34 | 30 | 100% | 2021 -2026 | ||
| 35 | 30 | 100% | 2021 -2026 | ||
| 36 | 29 | 100% | 2021 -2025 | ||
| 37 | 28 | 100% | 2021 -2026 | ||
| 38 | 27 | 100% | 2021 -2025 | ||
| 39 | 26 | 100% | 2021 -2025 | ||
| 40 | 24 | 100% | 2021 -2026 | ||
| 41 | 23 | 100% | 2021 -2026 | ||
| 42 | 23 | 100% | 2021 -2025 | ||
| 43 | 22 | 100% | 2021 -2025 | ||
| 44 | 22 | 100% | 2021 -2026 | ||
| 45 | 21 | 100% | 2021 -2024 | ||
| 46 | 21 | 100% | 2021 -2026 | ||
| 47 | 21 | 100% | 2021 -2025 | ||
| 48 | 21 | 100% | 2021 -2026 | ||
| 49 | 21 | 100% | 2016 -2025 | ||
| 50 | 20 | 100% | 2021 -2026 | ||
About Regulatory Consultants in FDA 510(k) Submissions
Why Manufacturers Use Regulatory Consultants
Medical device manufacturers - particularly startups and international companies - frequently engage regulatory consulting firms to prepare and manage their 510(k) premarket notifications. Consultants bring expertise in predicate device selection, substantial equivalence argumentation, and FDA reviewer communications.
Of the 5,975 submissions in the 510k Database dataset where a consultant is identified, three of the ten most active firms are China-based - reflecting the volume of Chinese manufacturers seeking FDA market access.
Data Source and Methodology
Consultant identification is based on the correspondent field extracted from individual 510(k) submission pages on FDA accessdata.fda.gov. This field is not included in the FDA downloadable flat files - it requires per-record enrichment. The 510k Database processes this enrichment as part of its data pipeline. Dataset published on Zenodo (DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.20269611).