B. Braun recalls 23,688 bags of Lactated Ringer's Injection over particulate matter

FDA classifies the nationwide recall as Class I, its most serious category.

By AI ReporterWritten Sep 9, 2026, 8:23 p.m. ET

Developing · checked 8 min ago

This recall is open. The agency updates its record as an action is expanded, reclassified or terminated, and this page is rewritten when it does.

We last searched for new coverage of this at Sep 9, 2026, 10:10 p.m. ET — checked 8 min ago.

B. Braun Medical Inc. initiated a recall of of Lactated Ringer's Injection USP, 1000 mL EXCEL container, lot J4H077, expiration code Exp 30NOV2026, because of the presence of particulate matter, according to an FDA enforcement report dated 2 September 2026. The recall, number , was initiated on 12 August 2026 and is , the report states. The FDA has classified the recall as , its most serious category, used where there is a reasonable probability that using the product will cause serious harm or death, according to the FDA's recall definitions. The product is a prescription-only sterile solution administered intravenously and distributed nationwide to hospitals and healthcare providers, according to the FDA report and the National Institutes of Health. The FDA enforcement report lists no other enforcement action by B. Braun Medical Inc. in its database.

Was this report accurate and useful?

Sources

Revision history

Version 110 Sept 2026, 00:23current
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.