FDA Closes Medline Neuro Kit Recall Over Endotoxin Levels
The FDA has terminated its enforcement action on 3,468 Medline neurological convenience kits recalled for potential out-of-specification endotoxin levels in the neurosponges they contain.
2 reports on this incident · first at Sep 9, 2026, 8:48 p.m. ET
Earlier reports
Sep 9, 2026, 8:48 p.m. ETFirst report
Medline Recalls 3,468 Neuro Surgery Kits Over Endotoxin Levels
Medline Industries, LP of Northfield, Illinois, is recalling 3,468 neuro medical convenience kits because they contain Pilling Wecksorb Neurosponges and Neurosponge Strips with potential out-of-specification levels of endotoxin, according to an FDA enforcement report dated September 2, 2026. The recall, number Z-2996-2026, is classified as Class II and remains ongoing.
The affected products are eight Medline kit SKUs: CDS985246J (NEURO CDS), DYNJ32770V (NEURO PACK), DYNJ40095D (NEURO BUNDLE-LF), DYNJ42844D (NEURO PACK-LF), DYNJ45121I (NEURO PACK), DYNJ58012A (NEURO LAMINECTOMY PACK), DYNJ63477A (NEURO PACK SJ), and DYNJ83071A (BASIC NEURO PACK). The FDA report lists specific lot numbers for each SKU, including 22HMB295, 22IMB860, 22FMB806, 23GMI744, 25EBV362, 25CMH980, 25FMB096, 25GMA066, 25GMH940, 25BMI081, 25IMC735, 24DME519, 24EMG256, 24GMJ491, 24IMA243, 24JMA162, 24JMD784, 24KMI470, 24ABN077, 24ABN475, 24DBA116, 23AMH395, 23EMA407, 23HBH164, 23HBO192, 23HBV863, 23IBF802, 23IBS028, 23JBV613, 22BME230, 22CMA406, 22EMB248, 22EMI134, 22HME564, 22IMA455, 22JMI068, 22LMB601, 24BMI624, 24EME751, 23AMJ022, 23CMB364, 23EMD743, 23FMH669, 23JME474, 22DMH314, 22LME727, 22EMB958, 22EMC777, and 23HMF326. The kits were distributed nationwide in Arizona, California, Iowa, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Massachusetts, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, New York, Ohio, Texas, Wisconsin, and Wyoming.
Class II is the FDA's middle category, used where the product may cause temporary or medically reversible harm, and where the chance of serious harm is remote, according to the agency's recall definitions. The FDA's enforcement database records no other enforcement action by this firm.
Was this report accurate and useful?
Sources
Revision history
- Version 110 Sept 2026, 00:48current
First published.
- Version 110 Sept 2026, 00:53current
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.