ProDisc PDL-L-PT10SRecalls & reported problems
Synthes (U.S.A.) LP · POLYETHYLENE INLAY W/TANTALUM MARKER/LARGE-10MM-STERILE · Class 3 · Implant
All models of ProDisc (9)
Data updated Oct 16, 2026 from official FDA records · Editorial policy
- Adverse event reports
- 3
- Deaths reported
- 0
- Injuries reported
- 0
- Recalls naming it
- 0
Summary
The FDA's MAUDE database contains 3 adverse event reports that list this exact device (DI 10705034700045), received between Jun 27, 2019 and Jun 27, 2019 — classified as 3 malfunctions.
The most frequently reported specific device problem is “Device-Device Incompatibility” (3 reports).
Reports come from manufacturers, hospitals and patients and are not verified by the FDA. A report does not prove the device caused the event, and counts can't be used to compare devices or estimate failure rates. What reports can and can't tell you · How this data works · Data updated Oct 16, 2026.
Most reported problems
Device problems
- Device-Device Incompatibility3
Patient problems
- No Consequences Or Impact To Patient3
Recent adverse event reports
The 3 most recent of 3 reports, in the reporter's own words as published by the FDA.
MalfunctionJun 27, 2019Device-Device Incompatibility; Device-Device Incompatibility
IT WAS REPORTED THAT ON (B)(6) 2019, THE SURGEON HAD A 2 LEVEL PRODISC-L AND WAS HAVING TROUBLE GETTING THE POLYETHYLENE INLAYS TO GO INTO THE IMPLANTED ENDPLATES DURING AN UNKNOWN PROCEDURE. THE SURGEON THOUGHT THE ANGLE OF THE ACCESS MIGHT BE PUTTING PRESSURE ON THE INSERTER CAUSING THE PROBLEMS. HOWEVER, THE SURGEON TRIED A COUPLE OF DIFFERENT POLY INLAYS AND CHANGED OUT THE ENDPLATES TRYING TO FIND A RESOLUTION. AFTER SEVERAL ATTEMPTS THE SURGEON PUT THE IMPLANTS TOGETHER ON THE BACK TABLE AND INSERTED IT AS ONE PIECE. AFTER THE CASE, SURGEON PLAYED WITH THE INSERTER AND A DEMO IMPLANT AND COULDN'T FIND ANYTHING APPARENTLY WRONG WITH THE INSTRUMENTATION. IT WAS UNKNOWN IF THERE WAS SURGICAL DELAY. SURGICAL PROCEDURE OUTCOME AND PATIENT OUTCOME WERE UNKNOWN. CONCOMITANT DEVICE REPORTED: UNKNOWN INSERTER (PART# UNKNOWN, LOT# UNKNOWN, QUANTITY 1). THIS REPORT IS FOR ONE (1) POLYETHYLENE INLAY W/TANTALUM MARKER/LARGE-10 MM-STERILE. THIS IS REPORT 7 OF 7 FOR COMPLAINT (B)(4).
Patient problems: No Consequences Or Impact To Patient
MAUDE report 8740066 ↗MalfunctionJun 27, 2019Device-Device Incompatibility; Device-Device Incompatibility
IT WAS REPORTED THAT ON (B)(6) 2019, THE SURGEON HAD A 2 LEVEL PRODISC-L AND WAS HAVING TROUBLE GETTING THE POLYETHYLENE INLAYS TO GO INTO THE IMPLANTED ENDPLATES DURING AN UNKNOWN PROCEDURE. THE SURGEON THOUGHT THE ANGLE OF THE ACCESS MIGHT BE PUTTING PRESSURE ON THE INSERTER CAUSING THE PROBLEMS. HOWEVER, THE SURGEON TRIED A COUPLE OF DIFFERENT POLY INLAYS AND CHANGED OUT THE ENDPLATES TRYING TO FIND A RESOLUTION. AFTER SEVERAL ATTEMPTS THE SURGEON PUT THE IMPLANTS TOGETHER ON THE BACK TABLE AND INSERTED IT AS ONE PIECE. AFTER THE CASE, SURGEON PLAYED WITH THE INSERTER AND A DEMO IMPLANT AND COULDN'T FIND ANYTHING APPARENTLY WRONG WITH THE INSTRUMENTATION. IT WAS UNKNOWN IF THERE WAS SURGICAL DELAY. SURGICAL PROCEDURE OUTCOME AND PATIENT OUTCOME WERE UNKNOWN. CONCOMITANT DEVICE REPORTED: UNKNOWN INSERTER (PART# UNKNOWN, LOT# UNKNOWN, QUANTITY 1). THIS REPORT IS FOR ONE (1) POLYETHYLENE INLAY W/TANTALUM MARKER/LARGE-10MM-STERILE. THIS IS REPORT 4 OF 7 FOR COMPLAINT (B)(4).
Patient problems: No Consequences Or Impact To Patient
MAUDE report 8740047 ↗MalfunctionJun 27, 2019Device-Device Incompatibility; Device-Device Incompatibility
IT WAS REPORTED THAT ON (B)(6) 2019, THE SURGEON HAD A 2 LEVEL PRODISC-L AND WAS HAVING TROUBLE GETTING THE POLYETHYLENE INLAYS TO GO INTO THE IMPLANTED ENDPLATES DURING AN UNKNOWN PROCEDURE. THE SURGEON THOUGHT THE ANGLE OF THE ACCESS MIGHT BE PUTTING PRESSURE ON THE INSERTER CAUSING THE PROBLEMS. HOWEVER, THE SURGEON TRIED A COUPLE OF DIFFERENT POLY INLAYS AND CHANGED OUT THE ENDPLATES TRYING TO FIND A RESOLUTION. AFTER SEVERAL ATTEMPTS THE SURGEON PUT THE IMPLANTS TOGETHER ON THE BACK TABLE AND INSERTED IT AS ONE PIECE. AFTER THE CASE, SURGEON PLAYED WITH THE INSERTER AND A DEMO IMPLANT AND COULDN'T FIND ANYTHING APPARENTLY WRONG WITH THE INSTRUMENTATION. IT WAS UNKNOWN IF THERE WAS SURGICAL DELAY. SURGICAL PROCEDURE OUTCOME AND PATIENT OUTCOME WERE UNKNOWN. CONCOMITANT DEVICE REPORTED: UNKNOWN INSERTER (PART# UNKNOWN, LOT# UNKNOWN, QUANTITY 1). THIS REPORT IS FOR ONE (1) POLYETHYLENE INLAY W/TANTALUM MARKER/LARGE-10MM-STERILE. THIS IS REPORT 3 OF 7 FOR COMPLAINT (B)(4).
Patient problems: No Consequences Or Impact To Patient
MAUDE report 8740034 ↗
Other PROSTHESIS, INTERVERTEBRAL DISC devices
- Prodisc C SK PDSM5Centinel Spine, LLC · Prosthesis, Intervertebral Disc2 recalls4 reports
- Simplify® Cervical Artificial DiscNuvasive, Inc. · Prosthesis, Intervertebral Disc1 recall12 reports
- Prodisc C 09.820.055SCentinel Spine, LLC · Prosthesis, Intervertebral Disc1 recall9 reports
- Simplify® Cervical Artificial DiscNuvasive, Inc. · Prosthesis, Intervertebral Disc1 recall4 reports
- Prodisc C SK PDSXL5Centinel Spine, LLC · Prosthesis, Intervertebral Disc1 recall3 reports
- Simplify® Cervical Artificial DiscNuvasive, Inc. · Prosthesis, Intervertebral Disc1 recall3 reports
- Simplify® Cervical Artificial DiscNuvasive, Inc. · Prosthesis, Intervertebral Disc1 recall3 reports
- Simplify® Cervical Artificial DiscNuvasive, Inc. · Prosthesis, Intervertebral Disc1 recall3 reports
Sources and updates
- Device record: FDA GUDID, file dated Oct 13, 2026 · View this device in AccessGUDID ↗
- Adverse event reports: FDA MAUDE, file dated Oct 14, 2026 · each report above links to its original FDA record
- Recalls: FDA Medical Device Recalls, file dated Oct 16, 2026
- Page last rebuilt: Oct 16, 2026. Data downloaded through openFDA, which notes it is not validated for clinical or regulatory use.
How reports and recalls are matched · Editorial policy · Report an error on this page