FirstAlerts

American Regent Expands Epinephrine Injection Recall Over Cracked, Leaking Vials

The FDA announced an expanded recall of Epinephrine Injection, USP 30 mg per 30 mL due to cracking and leaking vials that could cause blockage and clotting in blood vessels.

3 reports on this incident · first at Sep 4, 2026, 9:13 a.m. ET

By AI ReporterFirst reported Sep 4, 2026, 9:00 a.m. ETWritten Sep 4, 2026, 9:22 a.m. ET
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration, as reported by Medical Daily, has expanded a recall of distributed by . The recall now includes vials with the identifying codes 25128L1C0, 25280L1C0, 26108L1C0, and NDC 0517-3030-01. The recall was initiated because the vials were cracking and leaking, which could lead to . No adverse events connected to the recall have been reported, according to Medical Daily. Consumers are advised to stop using the product and either return it to the place of purchase or discard it.

Earlier reports

  1. Sep 4, 2026, 9:16 a.m. ET

    FDA Reports Injuries Linked to American Regent Epinephrine Recall

    The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has received reports of injuries or illnesses connected to the recall of Epinephrine Injection, USP 30 mg per 30 mL vials manufactured by American Regent, according to Medical Daily. The agency did not specify the nature or number of these events.

    The recall, initiated due to vials that were cracking and leaking, poses a hazard of blockage and clotting in blood vessels. The affected lots are identified by codes 25128L1C0, 25280L1C0, and 26108L1C0, with NDC 0517-3030-01. The recall is nationwide.

    The FDA advises consumers to stop using the product and either return it to the place of purchase or discard it. No further details on the reported adverse events have been provided.

  2. Sep 4, 2026, 9:13 a.m. ETFirst report

    American Regent Recalls Epinephrine Injection Vials Over Cracking and Leaking

    American Regent is recalling Epinephrine Injection, USP 30 mg per 30 mL nationwide, according to the FDA as reported by Medical Daily. The recall was initiated because the vials were cracking and leaking, which could cause blockage and clotting in blood vessels.

    The affected product can be identified by the following codes: 25128L1C0, 25280L1C0, 26108L1C0, and NDC 0517-3030-01. No adverse events connected to the recall have been reported.

    Consumers are advised to stop using the product and either return it to the place of purchase or discard it.

Was this report accurate and useful?

Sources

Revision history

  1. Version 14 Sept 2026, 13:22current

    First published.

  2. Version 14 Sept 2026, 13:13current

    First published.

  3. Version 14 Sept 2026, 13:16current

    First published.

How we work

This site models an investigative reporter rather than a wire desk. The aim is the most complete, accurate and timely account we can assemble — all three, not a trade between them. Reports go out within minutes of the coverage they are built from, carrying context a newsroom would otherwise need a day and a records request to gather: what has happened at this place before, what the operator’s record is, which aircraft it actually was.

Reports are built from primary sources — accident and court records, official registries, weather observations, agency statements — and from reputable news organisations, each named where their reporting is used. Facts are extracted before anything is written, and every one must be supported by a quotation found in the source itself; the model that writes the report is given only those verified facts and never sees the article, so it cannot introduce a detail no source stated.

Where sources disagree we publish the disagreement, attributed, rather than picking a figure. Where a fact comes from a record rather than a reporter, we say so, and the language matches: an instrument reading is never described as something anyone confirmed. Some things are deliberately withheld — a suspect is not named until an agency names them on the record, victims until families or officials release them — and corrections appear as visible revisions, never as silent edits.

None of that makes a report true. A quotation check proves a source said something, not that it was right, and an automated system can be confidently wrong in ways the checks do not catch. If something here is wrong, the feedback above is how it gets found. The full methodology, including what we refuse to publish.