Pinned straw:
I'm no expert, however, I doubt this is significant.
People with medical implants with ferromagnetic components generally have to manage the risk of interference from external magnets. For example, the powerful magnet of an MRI creates huge intereference with anything ferromagnetic. My expectectation is that there will be a strengthening of controls (via patient information and directions to prescribing clinicians) to give clear instructuctions, and/or assess risk and/or limit use.
Of course, regulators will assess the safety noticies and the remedies being proposed by the firm and have the power to issue a recall notice. However, it is unclear to me that this would result in this case. My reason for holding this view is that patients with ferromagnetic implants have a broader risk exposure to manage. I would think the worst case scenario would be that affected patients would be advised or required to be issued a replacement device without magnets. However, even in that case, the exposure to $RMD would be minimal.
This is of a fundamentally different level of seriousness to the Phillips recall, which was due to material degradation of an integral component within the device. A sound abatement polyeurethane foam was found to degrade, creating risk that particles of the foam might find their way into the device airway and enter the patient.
At this stage $RMD clearly don't consider it a material event, given they haven't disclosed anything. But perhaps it is still under consideration by the FDA?