• Decrease font size
  • Return font size to normal
  • Increase font size
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services

MAUDE Adverse Event Report: REVISION OPTICS, INC. RAINDROP NEAR VISION INLAY; CORNEAL INLAY

  • Print
  • Share
  • E-mail
-
Super Search Devices@FDA
510(k) | DeNovo | Registration & Listing | Adverse Events | Recalls | PMA | HDE | Classification | Standards
CFR Title 21 | Radiation-Emitting Products | X-Ray Assembler | Medsun Reports | CLIA | TPLC
 

REVISION OPTICS, INC. RAINDROP NEAR VISION INLAY; CORNEAL INLAY Back to Search Results
Model Number 610-0001
Device Problem Adverse Event Without Identified Device or Use Problem (2993)
Patient Problems Corneal Clouding/Hazing (1878); Inflammation (1932); Loss of Vision (2139); Visual Disturbances (2140); Halo (2227)
Event Date 10/13/2017
Event Type  Injury  
Manufacturer Narrative
Device identifiers have been requested.Corneal inflammation is listed in the device labeling as a known potential risk.(b)(4).
 
Event Description
The patient underwent implantation of the raindrop corneal inlay (date unknown).The inlay was explanted on (b)(6) 2017 due to corneal inflammation.The seriousness of the inflammation and impact on vision are not known at this time.Additional information has been requested.
 
Manufacturer Narrative
The device history record review of the manufacturing lot for this device was performed and there were no discrepancies or unusual findings related to the reported issue.Corneal haze, halos, and glare are listed in the device labeling as known potential risks.Additional information: complaint reference number: (b)(4).
 
Event Description
Patient follow-up was requested from the surgeon, who provided the following additional information.The procedure to implant the corneal inlay in the patient's left eye was uneventful.Corneal haze was first observed at the one-month postoperative visit with recurrences of mild haze at 4 and 5 months postoperatively.Prior to explantation of the corneal inlay, the corneal haze progressed to grade 3+, located in the area of the inlay.The corneal haze was associated with significant halos and glare that impacted the patient's ability to drive.In addition, the patient's best corrected distance visual acuity (bcdva) decreased from 20/20 (preoperatively) to 20/50 (immediately prior to inlay explantation).Post inlay explant, the corneal haze and halo/glare symptoms resolved and bcdva improved to 20/25-2.
 
Search Alerts/Recalls

  New Search  |  Submit an Adverse Event Report

Brand Name
RAINDROP NEAR VISION INLAY
Type of Device
CORNEAL INLAY
Manufacturer (Section D)
REVISION OPTICS, INC.
25651 atlantic ocean drive
suite a1
lake forest CA 92630 8835
Manufacturer (Section G)
REVISION OPTICS, INC.
25651 atlantic ocean drive
suite a1
lake forest CA 92630 8835
Manufacturer Contact
pushpita singh
25651 atlantic ocean drive
suite a1
lake forest, CA 92630-8835
9497072740
MDR Report Key7019045
MDR Text Key91765589
Report Number3005956347-2017-00138
Device Sequence Number1
Product Code LQE
UDI-Device Identifier10850394006013
UDI-Public(01)10850394006013
Combination Product (y/n)N
Reporter Country CodeUS
PMA/PMN Number
P150034
Number of Events Reported1
Summary Report (Y/N)N
Report Source Manufacturer
Source Type company representative,health
Reporter Occupation Physician
Type of Report Initial,Followup
Report Date 12/27/2017
1 Device was Involved in the Event
1 Patient was Involved in the Event
Is this an Adverse Event Report? Yes
Is this a Product Problem Report? No
Device Operator Physician
Device Expiration Date10/21/2019
Device Model Number610-0001
Device Catalogue NumberRD1-1
Device Lot Number003007
Was Device Available for Evaluation? No
Is the Reporter a Health Professional? Yes
Was the Report Sent to FDA? No
Initial Date Manufacturer Received 10/12/2017
Initial Date FDA Received11/10/2017
Supplement Dates Manufacturer Received11/28/2017
Supplement Dates FDA Received12/27/2017
Was Device Evaluated by Manufacturer? Device Not Returned to Manufacturer
Date Device Manufactured10/21/2016
Is the Device Single Use? Yes
Is This a Reprocessed and Reused Single-Use Device? No
Type of Device Usage Initial
Patient Sequence Number1
Patient Outcome(s) Required Intervention;
Patient Age59 YR
-
-