ReviewNeurosurgery practice2026
Medical Device Recalls in Neurosurgery: A United States Regulatory Analysis.
Review in Neurosurgery practice, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesThe neurosurgery landscape has witnessed substantial advancements in recent years, with an increasing reliance on medical devices to enhance surgical safety and efficacy. However, alongside this progress, there has been a rise in the number of device recalls, prompting a need for comprehensive analysis to understand the underlying trends and factors contributing to these recalls. This quantitative review aimed to analyze 2 decades of U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recall data within neurosurgery to identify patterns and trends in device recalls. By examining the frequency, timing, and reason for recalls, we sought to identify the specific types of neurosurgical devices that are most often recalled.
methodsUsing the openFDA device recalls database, we queried recall data for neurosurgical devices from January 2003 to December 2022. Recalls were categorized based on device specialty and reason, with validation by neurosurgical experts by the FDA medical device recalls database. The analysis focused on identifying peaks and trends in recall frequencies over the study period.
resultsA total of 412 unique neurosurgical device recalls were identified from 2003 to 2022. Recalls increased until 2013, then declined through 2022. General neurosurgery devices accounted for the largest proportion (168, 40.8%), followed by stereotaxic (94, 22.8%) and functional (79, 19.2%) devices, consistently making up the largest share each year. Most recalls were class II (362, 87.9%), followed by class I (28) and class III (22). The most common cause was process errors (67, 14.8%), followed by issues with components/materials (56, 13.6%), device design (61, 14.8%), and labeling (50, 12.1%). Marketing-related issues were least frequent (16, 3.9%).
conclusionGeneral neurosurgery devices accounted for the highest recall rates, warranting closer evaluation of contributing factors. Process errors were the leading cause, with most being class II recalls. Understanding recall patterns can help guide strategies to improve device safety and reduce patient risk.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.