Biocompatibility Testing Cost Calculator (ISO 10993)

On this page

• Calculator
• What tests do I need?
• Cost breakdown by test
• What drives cost
• Timelines
• How to reduce cost
• How to choose a lab
• FAQ
• References

Biocompatibility Testing Cost Calculator

Use the calculator above to get an instant estimate, or fill out the detailed form below for a comprehensive breakdown.

How required biocompatibility endpoints are determined

Biocompatibility testing cost depends on which tests (endpoints) your device requires. The required endpoints are determined by a risk-based approach using three key factors:

1. Device Contact Category

Medical devices are classified into three contact categories per ISO 10993-1:

• Surface devices: Contact intact skin, mucosal membranes, or breached surfaces (e.g., wound dressings, electrodes, surgical drapes)
• External communicating devices: Contact body orifices or breached surfaces (e.g., catheters, endoscopes, dental devices)
• Implant devices: Placed inside the body (e.g., pacemakers, joint replacements, stents, orthopedic implants)

2. Contact Duration

The duration of contact determines the extent of testing required:

• Limited contact (≤ 24 hours): Minimal testing — typically cytotoxicity, irritation, and sensitization
• Prolonged contact (>24h to 30 days): Expanded testing — adds systemic toxicity, genotoxicity, and subchronic studies
• Permanent contact (>30 days): Comprehensive testing — includes implantation studies, chronic toxicity, and carcinogenicity considerations

3. Contact Site

The specific tissue or body system contacted adds additional requirements:

• Blood contact: Requires hemocompatibility testing (ISO 10993-4) — adds $5,000-$12,000 to cost
• Circulating blood: May require additional systemic toxicity and pyrogenicity testing
• Bone/tissue contact: Implantation studies may be required for implants

The FDA Endpoint Matrix

The FDA provides endpoint tables that map device contact type, duration, and site to required tests. This matrix is the foundation for most biocompatibility testing labs when developing a Biological Evaluation Plan (BEP). The FDA's Biocompatibility Evaluation Endpoints by Contact Duration table is the authoritative reference for endpoint selection.

Real-World Examples

Cost breakdown by common ISO 10993 tests

Below is a detailed breakdown of typical costs for each biocompatibility test, based on comprehensive analysis of pricing data from 70+ accredited biocompatibility testing labs in our directory. Our pricing analysis includes labs from the US, EU, and Asia, accounting for regional variations, accreditation levels (ISO 17025, GLP), and project scope differences.

Data Sources: Pricing ranges are derived from:

• Public pricing data from accredited labs
• Quote analysis from our directory providers
• Industry benchmarks and regulatory submission data
• Regional pricing variations (US, EU, Asia)

Note: Actual quotes may vary ±20-30% based on specific device requirements, lab capacity, and project complexity. Always request quotes from multiple labs for accurate pricing.

Cytotoxicity Testing (ISO 10993-5)

Typical cost: $800-$1,800

What it is: Evaluates cell damage or death caused by device extracts. This is typically the first and most fundamental biocompatibility test.

When required: Almost always required for all device categories and contact durations.

Turnaround: 2-4 weeks

Sample needs: Device extracts (polar and non-polar solvents)

Sensitization Testing (ISO 10993-10:2021)

Typical cost: $2,500-$6,000

What it is: Assesses potential for allergic reactions (delayed hypersensitivity) using methods like the Maximization Test (GPMT) or Local Lymph Node Assay (LLNA).

When required: Required for devices with prolonged or permanent contact. May be required for limited contact devices depending on contact site.

Turnaround: 6-10 weeks (in vivo methods)

Sample needs: Device extracts and/or device material

Irritation / Intracutaneous Reactivity (ISO 10993-23:2021)

Typical cost: $3,500-$8,000

What it is: Evaluates local tissue irritation potential. ISO 10993-23 (2021) emphasizes in vitro methods, reducing animal testing requirements.

When required: Required for surface devices and external communicating devices. May be waived for some implant devices with proper justification.

Turnaround: 4-8 weeks (in vitro methods are faster than traditional in vivo)

Sample needs: Device extracts (polar and non-polar)

Note: The shift toward ISO 10993-23 in vitro methods can reduce costs and timelines compared to traditional animal-based irritation testing.

Acute Systemic Toxicity (ISO 10993-11)

Typical cost: $2,000-$5,000

What it is: Assesses systemic effects from device extracts administered via injection or oral routes.

When required: Required for devices with prolonged or permanent contact, especially those with systemic exposure.

Turnaround: 4-6 weeks

Sample needs: Device extracts

Material-mediated Pyrogenicity (ISO 10993-11)

Typical cost: $2,500-$6,000

What it is: Evaluates fever-inducing potential. Can use Monocyte Activation Test (MAT) or traditional rabbit pyrogen test.

When required: Required for external communicating devices and implants, especially those contacting circulating blood.

Turnaround: 3-5 weeks

Sample needs: Device extracts or device material

Genotoxicity Testing

Typical cost: $4,000-$9,000

What it is: Evaluates potential for genetic damage. Typically includes Ames test (bacterial reverse mutation) plus follow-on tests if needed (mouse lymphoma, chromosomal aberration).

When required: Required for devices with prolonged or permanent contact. May be required for limited contact devices with certain materials.

Turnaround: 8-12 weeks (Ames test alone is 4-6 weeks; full battery takes longer)

Sample needs: Device extracts

Hemocompatibility Testing (ISO 10993-4)

Typical cost: $5,000-$12,000

What it is: Comprehensive evaluation for devices contacting blood. Includes hemolysis, thrombosis, coagulation, complement activation, and platelet activation tests.

When required: Required for all devices that contact circulating blood or blood path (direct or indirect).

Turnaround: 6-10 weeks

Sample needs: Device material and/or extracts, blood compatibility testing

Note: This is one of the most expensive test categories due to complexity and blood handling requirements.

Implantation Testing (ISO 10993-6)

Typical cost: $8,000-$18,000

What it is: Evaluates local tissue response to implants over time. Requires surgical implantation in animal models.

When required: Required for all implant devices with prolonged or permanent contact.

Turnaround: 12-20 weeks (includes implantation period and histopathology evaluation)

Sample needs: Finished device or representative material samples

Note: This is typically the most expensive and time-consuming test due to animal study requirements.

Chemical Characterization + Toxicological Risk Assessment (ISO 10993-18/17)

Typical cost: $10,000-$28,000

What it is: Identifies and quantifies extractable and leachable (E&L) compounds, then performs toxicological risk assessment to determine if additional biological testing is needed.

When required: Required for devices with new materials, multi-material assemblies, coatings, or when material composition is unknown. Can reduce need for biological testing if risk assessment is favorable.

Turnaround: 8-16 weeks (extraction + analysis + risk assessment)

Sample needs: Device material, extraction conditions must be defined

Note: While expensive upfront, chemical characterization can reduce overall testing costs by eliminating unnecessary biological tests through risk-based justification.

What makes biocompatibility testing expensive?

Understanding the factors that drive biocompatibility testing cost helps you budget accurately and identify opportunities to optimize spending. Here are the primary cost drivers:

1. Contact Category + Duration (Endpoint Selection)

Impact: High — This is the primary cost driver. More endpoints = higher cost.

• Limited contact surface device: 3-4 tests → $6,800-$15,800
• Prolonged contact external communicating: 6-8 tests → $18,000-$35,000
• Permanent contact implant: 8-10+ tests → $35,000-$70,000+

The FDA endpoint matrix determines which tests are required. You cannot skip required endpoints, but you can optimize by ensuring accurate device categorization.

2. Device Complexity (Material & Design)

Impact: Medium-High — Adds 10-60% to base test costs

• Single material: Standard pricing
• Multi-material assembly: +10-30% (more extraction work, may need separate testing)
• Coating/drug/polymer blend: +20-60% (requires chemical characterization, complex extraction strategies)
• Unknown materials: Requires full chemical characterization → adds $10,000-$28,000

3. Extraction Strategy Complexity

Impact: Medium — Affects sample preparation costs

• Polar and non-polar extracts required for most tests
• Surface area calculations affect extract volumes needed
• Multiple replicates increase sample preparation time
• Complex geometries may require custom extraction protocols

4. In Vivo vs In Vitro Selection

Impact: Medium — In vitro methods are generally faster and less expensive

• ISO 10993-23 (in vitro irritation): $3,500-$8,000, 4-8 weeks
• Traditional in vivo irritation: $5,000-$12,000, 8-12 weeks
• Many labs now prefer in vitro methods when acceptable per ISO 10993-23

5. Quality System Requirements (GLP)

Impact: Medium — Adds 10-25% to test costs

• Good Laboratory Practice (GLP) compliance required for some regulatory submissions
• GLP labs have higher overhead (documentation, QA, audits)
• Not all tests require GLP — check with your biocompatibility testing lab and regulatory strategy

6. Rush Turnaround

Impact: Medium — Adds 15-50% premium

• Standard timelines: 8-16 weeks for full test battery
• Rush service: 4-8 weeks (if possible) → 15-50% premium
• Some tests cannot be rushed (e.g., implantation studies have fixed observation periods)

7. Failures and Re-tests

Impact: High (if occurs) — Can double costs

• If a test fails, you may need to modify the device and re-test
• Re-testing costs are typically 80-100% of original test cost
• Pre-testing material screening can help avoid failures

8. Protocol Development & BEP Support

Impact: Low-Medium — Adds $2,000-$8,000

• Biological Evaluation Plan (BEP) development: $2,000-$5,000
• Custom protocol development for novel devices: $3,000-$8,000
• Regulatory strategy consultation: $1,500-$4,000

9. Shipping, Customs, and Sample Quantity

Impact: Low — Typically $500-$2,000

• International shipping for samples
• Customs clearance for regulated materials
• Sample quantity requirements vary by test (plan ahead to avoid delays)

10. Lab Location & Accreditation Level

Impact: Low-Medium — Regional price variations

• US labs: Generally higher costs ($15,000-$50,000+ for standard packages), strong FDA familiarity, excellent for US submissions
• EU labs: Competitive pricing ($12,000-$40,000+), strong MDR expertise, excellent for EU/UK submissions
• Asian labs: Often lower costs ($8,000-$30,000+), may have longer shipping times, good for cost-sensitive projects
• Accreditation level: ISO 17025 accreditation is standard; GLP compliance adds 10-25% but may be required for certain submissions
• Regional expertise: Labs familiar with local regulatory requirements can help optimize testing strategy

Typical timelines (planning your submission)

Biocompatibility testing timelines are critical for regulatory submission planning. Below are typical timelines by test bundle, from sample submission to final report delivery.

Basic Triplet (Surface Device, Limited Contact)

Tests: Cytotoxicity + Sensitization + Irritation

Timeline: 6-10 weeks

• Week 1-2: Sample preparation and extraction
• Week 3-4: Cytotoxicity testing (2-4 weeks)
• Week 5-8: Sensitization testing (6-10 weeks total)
• Week 5-8: Irritation testing (4-8 weeks, can run in parallel)
• Week 9-10: Report compilation and QA review

Critical path: Sensitization is typically the longest test in this bundle.

Prolonged Contact External Communicating Device

Tests: Cytotoxicity + Sensitization + Irritation + Systemic Toxicity + Genotoxicity + Pyrogenicity

Timeline: 12-16 weeks

• Week 1-2: Sample preparation, extraction, BEP finalization
• Week 3-4: Cytotoxicity (can start immediately)
• Week 5-8: Irritation testing (4-8 weeks)
• Week 5-9: Systemic toxicity (4-6 weeks)
• Week 5-10: Pyrogenicity (3-5 weeks)
• Week 5-14: Genotoxicity — Ames test (8-12 weeks, longest)
• Week 7-12: Sensitization (6-10 weeks)
• Week 15-16: Report compilation, toxicological risk assessment

Critical path: Genotoxicity (Ames test) is typically the bottleneck. Some tests can run in parallel.

Implant / Permanent Contact Device

Tests: Full battery + Implantation + Chemical Characterization (if needed)

Timeline: 20-36 weeks

• Week 1-4: Chemical characterization (if required) — 8-16 weeks total
• Week 1-2: Sample preparation, BEP
• Week 3-16: All biological tests (run in parallel where possible)
• Week 5-24: Implantation study (12-20 weeks — includes implantation period + histopathology)
• Week 25-28: Final report compilation, Biological Evaluation Report (BER)

Critical path: Implantation study has the longest fixed timeline due to observation periods.

Planning Your Submission Timeline

Start early: Begin biocompatibility planning during device design phase. Here's a recommended timeline for regulatory submission planning:

Rush Options (If Available)

Some biocompatibility testing labs offer rush services, but:

• Not all tests can be rushed (implantation studies have fixed observation periods)
• Rush service adds 15-50% premium
• Typical rush timeline: 50-70% of standard timeline (if possible)
• Availability depends on lab capacity

Factors That Can Delay Timelines

• Insufficient samples: Delays start of testing
• Poor sample quality: May require re-extraction
• Test failures: Require device modification and re-testing
• Lab capacity: High-demand periods (Q4) may have longer queues
• Regulatory questions: May require protocol amendments
• Custom protocols: Novel devices may need protocol development time

How to reduce cost without risking compliance

Reducing biocompatibility testing cost doesn't mean cutting corners. A risk-based approach, proper planning, and strategic material selection can reduce costs by 20-40% while maintaining regulatory compliance.

1. Use Existing Material Characterizations (Where Justified)

Potential savings: $10,000-$28,000

• If your device uses materials with existing biocompatibility data (same supplier, same grade, same processing), you may be able to reference prior data
• Material equivalency justification can eliminate need for chemical characterization
• Work with your biocompatibility testing lab to evaluate prior data acceptability — many labs offer prior data evaluation services ($2,000-$5,000) that can save tens of thousands in testing costs
• Requirement: Must demonstrate material equivalence (same composition, processing, sterilization)

2. Avoid Unnecessary Endpoints Through Strong Rationale

Potential savings: $2,000-$12,000 per avoided test

• Accurate device categorization is critical — over-categorization leads to unnecessary tests
• Use Biological Evaluation Plan (BEP) to justify endpoint selection
• Example: If device truly has "limited contact" (not prolonged), you avoid systemic toxicity and genotoxicity
• Work with regulatory consultants to ensure proper categorization

3. Plan Sample Quantities Early

Potential savings: $500-$2,000 + time

• Order sufficient samples upfront to avoid re-ordering delays
• Coordinate sample preparation with lab to minimize waste
• Plan for potential re-tests (order 20-30% extra samples)
• Consider sample sharing across multiple tests where possible

4. Choose Labs That Can Bundle and Coordinate

Potential savings: 10-20% on total project

• Labs that perform multiple tests can often bundle pricing
• Coordinated testing reduces project management overhead
• Single lab reduces shipping and customs costs
• Compare bundled quotes from multiple biocompatibility labs to find best value

5. Optimize Extraction Strategy

Potential savings: $1,000-$3,000

• Work with lab to optimize extraction conditions (may reduce extraction time)
• Use standard extraction protocols when possible (avoid custom protocols)
• Plan extraction strategy in BEP to avoid re-extraction

6. Consider In Vitro Methods When Acceptable

Potential savings: $1,500-$4,000 per test

• ISO 10993-23 (in vitro irritation) is often faster and less expensive than in vivo
• Many regulatory authorities accept in vitro methods when properly justified
• Discuss in vitro options with your lab and regulatory strategy team

7. Avoid GLP When Not Required

Potential savings: 10-25% per test

• GLP adds 10-25% to test costs
• Not all regulatory submissions require GLP
• Check regulatory requirements for your market (FDA 510(k) may not require GLP for all tests)
• Use GLP only when required or for high-risk devices

8. Plan for Success (Avoid Failures)

Potential savings: $5,000-$20,000+ (avoiding re-tests)

• Pre-test material screening can identify issues early
• Work with material suppliers to ensure biocompatible grades
• Consider preliminary cytotoxicity screening before full battery
• Address any material concerns during design phase

9. Strategic Lab Selection

Potential savings: 15-30% regional variation

• Compare quotes from labs in different regions
• Consider EU labs for MDR submissions (often competitive pricing)
• Balance cost with regulatory expertise (FDA familiarity may be worth premium for US submissions)
• Use our biocompatibility testing labs directory to compare options

10. Avoid Rush When Possible

Potential savings: 15-50% premium avoided

• Plan ahead to avoid rush fees
• Start biocompatibility planning early in device development
• Build buffer time into submission timeline
• Only use rush when absolutely necessary

How to choose a biocompatibility testing lab

Selecting the right biocompatibility testing lab is critical for regulatory success, cost optimization, and timeline management. Use this checklist to evaluate labs:

1. Relevant Testing Scope

• Device category expertise: Does the lab have experience with your device type (implant vs surface vs external communicating)?
• Contact site expertise: For blood-contact devices, ensure lab has hemocompatibility capabilities
• Material expertise: For novel materials or coatings, verify lab has experience with similar materials
• Test menu: Can the lab perform all required endpoints, or will you need multiple labs?

2. Chemical Characterization + Toxicology Capabilities

• ISO 10993-18 expertise: Can the lab perform extractables and leachables (E&L) testing?
• Toxicological risk assessment: Does the lab have in-house toxicologists or partnerships?
• Analytical capabilities: GC-MS, LC-MS, ICP-MS for compound identification and quantification
• Risk assessment: Can lab perform ISO 10993-17 toxicological risk assessment to potentially reduce biological testing?

3. Turnaround SLAs and Capacity

• Standard timelines: What are typical turnaround times for your test bundle?
• Rush availability: Can lab accommodate rush requests if needed?
• Current capacity: Is the lab at capacity, or can they start immediately?
• Queue times: How long before testing can begin after sample receipt?

4. Report Quality & Regulatory Familiarity

• FDA submission experience: Are reports suitable for FDA 510(k), PMA, De Novo submissions?
• EU MDR experience: For EU submissions, does lab understand MDR requirements?
• Report format: Are reports comprehensive, well-documented, and submission-ready?
• Regulatory support: Does lab provide pre-submission consultation and support?

5. Communication & Project Management

• Dedicated project manager: Will you have a single point of contact?
• Communication frequency: How often will you receive updates?
• Responsiveness: How quickly does lab respond to questions?
• Transparency: Is lab transparent about timelines, costs, and potential issues?

6. Accreditation & Quality Systems

• ISO 17025: Is lab accredited to ISO 17025?
• GLP compliance: Can lab provide GLP testing if required?
• FDA inspection history: For US submissions, check FDA inspection history
• Quality certifications: What other quality certifications does lab hold?

7. Pricing & Value

• Transparent pricing: Are costs clearly communicated upfront?
• Bundled discounts: Does lab offer discounts for multiple tests?
• Hidden costs: Are there additional fees for shipping, customs, report revisions?
• Value comparison: Compare total project cost (not just per-test pricing) across multiple labs

8. BEP/BER Support

• BEP development: Can lab help develop Biological Evaluation Plan?
• BER preparation: Does lab prepare Biological Evaluation Report?
• Regulatory strategy: Can lab provide guidance on test selection and risk-based approach?
• Documentation support: Will lab help with regulatory submission documentation?

9. Geographic Considerations

• Shipping logistics: Consider shipping time and costs for samples
• Time zone alignment: For frequent communication, time zone overlap may be important
• Regulatory jurisdiction: Some labs have stronger expertise in specific regions (US vs EU)
• Language: Ensure clear communication in your preferred language

10. References & Track Record

• Client references: Ask for references from similar device types
• Submission success rate: How often do their reports lead to successful regulatory approvals?
• Industry reputation: Check reviews and industry feedback
• Years in business: Experience often correlates with quality and reliability

Red Flags to Avoid

• ❌ Labs that promise unrealistic timelines or prices (too good to be true)
• ❌ Lack of proper accreditation (ISO 17025) or quality systems
• ❌ Poor communication or unresponsive project managers
• ❌ Vague pricing or hidden fees (ask for detailed quotes)
• ❌ Limited scope or inability to perform all required tests (may require multiple labs)
• ❌ No experience with your device category or regulatory pathway
• ❌ Pressure to skip required endpoints or use inadequate testing
• ❌ No GLP capability when GLP is required for your submission
• ❌ Inability to provide BEP/BER support if needed

Get quotes (fast)

Ready to get competitive quotes from accredited biocompatibility testing labs? Follow these three simple steps:

Frequently asked questions about biocompatibility testing cost

References & Resources

The following resources provide authoritative information on biocompatibility testing requirements, standards, and regulatory guidance:

Regulatory Standards & Guidance

• ISO 10993-1:2018 - Biological evaluation of medical devices — Part 1: Evaluation and testing within a risk management process. Provides the framework for biocompatibility evaluation and endpoint selection. This is the foundational standard used by all biocompatibility testing labs.
• FDA Guidance: Use of ISO 10993-1 - FDA guidance document on biological evaluation of medical devices, including endpoint tables by contact type and duration. Essential reading for US market submissions.
• FDA Biocompatibility Assessment Resource Center - Comprehensive FDA resource on biocompatibility evaluation, including endpoint matrices, testing strategies, and frequently asked questions.
• FDA Endpoint Tables - Official FDA tables mapping device contact type, duration, and site to required biocompatibility endpoints. This is the authoritative reference for endpoint selection.
• EU MDR 2017/745 - European Medical Device Regulation requiring biological safety evaluation for medical devices. ISO 10993 is widely accepted for demonstrating MDR compliance.
• ISO 10993-10:2021 - Tests for skin sensitization (allergic reactions). Specifies methods for assessing delayed hypersensitivity potential.
• ISO 10993-23:2021 - Tests for irritation/intracutaneous reactivity. Emphasizes in vitro methods, reducing animal testing requirements. Many labs now use ISO 10993-23 in vitro methods.
• ISO 10993-18 - Chemical characterization of materials (extractables and leachables testing). Required for devices with new materials or unknown composition.
• ISO 10993-17 - Toxicological risk assessment framework for evaluating chemical characterization data. Can reduce need for biological testing through risk-based justification.
• FDA Draft Guidance: Chemical Analysis for Biocompatibility Assessment (2024) - FDA's latest guidance on chemical characterization and toxicological risk assessment approaches.

Find Accredited Biocompatibility Testing Labs

Compare 70+ accredited biocompatibility testing labs in our directory:

• Biocompatibility Testing Labs Directory - Browse labs by location, capabilities, and read provider profiles
• Request Quotes from Multiple Labs - Submit your device requirements and get competitive quotes

Related Regulatory Directories

Explore related testing and consulting services:

• Sterilization & Microbiology Testing Labs - For sterility testing, bioburden, and bacterial endotoxin testing
• Packaging & Shelf Life Testing Labs - For package validation and aging studies
• Chemical Characterization & E&L Testing - For extractables and leachables analysis
• Toxicology Consulting - For toxicological risk assessment and regulatory support

Related Guides & Resources

• ISO 10993-1 Explained - Understanding the biological evaluation framework and risk-based approach to endpoint selection
• ISO 10993-18 Chemical Characterization Guide - When and how to perform extractables and leachables (E&L) testing, and how it can reduce biological testing requirements
• BEP vs BER - Understanding Biological Evaluation Plans (BEP) and Biological Evaluation Reports (BER), and when you need them
• FDA 510(k) Biocompatibility Requirements - Testing strategies for 510(k) submissions, including when GLP is required
• EU MDR Biocompatibility Requirements - How ISO 10993 testing supports MDR compliance
• Material Equivalency Guide - How to use existing biocompatibility data to reduce testing costs
• In Vitro vs In Vivo Testing - Understanding when in vitro methods (ISO 10993-23) can replace animal testing

Directory Data & Analysis

Our pricing estimates are based on comprehensive analysis of 70+ accredited biocompatibility testing labs in our directory, including:

• Regional pricing variations (US, EU, Asia)
• Accreditation level impact (ISO 17025, GLP)
• Service scope differences (BEP/BER support, toxicology capabilities)
• Turnaround time variations
• Package vs à la carte pricing models

To get accurate pricing for your specific device: Use our quote request system to receive competitive quotes from multiple labs. This ensures you're comparing apples-to-apples pricing based on your exact requirements.