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

MAUDE Adverse Event Report: OPTONOL LTD. EX-PRESS GLAUCOMA FILTRATION DEVICE; IMPLANT, EYE VALVE

  • 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
 

OPTONOL LTD. EX-PRESS GLAUCOMA FILTRATION DEVICE; IMPLANT, EYE VALVE Back to Search Results
Model Number P-50 PL
Device Problems Complete Blockage (1094); No Flow (2991)
Patient Problem No Consequences Or Impact To Patient (2199)
Event Date 07/19/2016
Event Type  Injury  
Manufacturer Narrative
Evaluation summary: the product was returned for analysis.Investigation including root cause analysis is in progress.A supplemental mdr will be filed as necessary in accordance with 21 cfr 803.56 when additional reportable information becomes available.(b)(4).
 
Event Description
A customer reported following a glaucoma filtration device implant procedure, there was no flow of aqueous humor from the device.The device was explanted because the customer thinks the device is clogged.A trabeculectomy was performed.Additional information was requested.
 
Manufacturer Narrative
A customer reported that no aqueous humor outflow was confirmed 2 months after implanting a shunt to a patient's eye.The shunt was explanted and trabeculectomy was performed.No data regarding product identity was received i.E.No lot or serial number were indicated for the event; therefore, the device history record (dhr) could not be reviewed.The product was returned for analysis and the reported complaint was confirmed.In addition an unknown material seen on the shunt back plate.After slicing the shunt, the lumen was seen to be open, therefore, there is no indication for a manufacturing related factors that could cause the blockage.During production, 100% final inspection is being performed on the entire batch, including visual inspection and inner illumination.If a blockage would be noticed, the product would have been rejected immediately.Having said that, one may conclude, that the blockage was formed after the product had left the manufacturing plant.The root cause is external - related to patient condition / non-product factors, however, the blockage could have been caused by many different reasons during and after the clinical procedure.The blockage does not seem to be product related since two lumens, on either side of the restriction unit were found and no welding penetrations were found.Therefore, there is no evidence for an inherent defect that might have caused the event, and the root cause is seem to be external - related to patient condition / non-product factors.(b)(4).
 
Search Alerts/Recalls

  New Search  |  Submit an Adverse Event Report

Brand Name
EX-PRESS GLAUCOMA FILTRATION DEVICE
Type of Device
IMPLANT, EYE VALVE
Manufacturer (Section D)
OPTONOL LTD.
kiryat hatikshoret
communication center
neve-ilan 90850
IS  90850
Manufacturer (Section G)
OPTONOL LTD.
kiryat hatikshoret
communication center
neve-ilan 90850
IS   90850
Manufacturer Contact
rita lopez
6201 south freeway
mail stop ab2-6
fort worth, TX 76134
8175514846
MDR Report Key5961625
MDR Text Key55108887
Report Number3003701944-2016-00183
Device Sequence Number1
Product Code KYF
Combination Product (y/n)N
Reporter Country CodeJA
PMA/PMN Number
K012852
Number of Events Reported1
Summary Report (Y/N)N
Report Source Manufacturer
Source Type foreign,health professional
Reporter Occupation Health Professional
Type of Report Initial,Followup
Report Date 11/29/2016
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? Yes
Device Operator Health Professional
Device Model NumberP-50 PL
Device Catalogue Number60053
Device Lot NumberASKU
Was Device Available for Evaluation? Device Returned to Manufacturer
Date Returned to Manufacturer09/07/2016
Is the Reporter a Health Professional? Yes
Initial Date Manufacturer Received 08/29/2016
Initial Date FDA Received09/19/2016
Supplement Dates Manufacturer ReceivedNot provided
Supplement Dates FDA Received11/29/2016
Was Device Evaluated by Manufacturer? Yes
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) Other; Required Intervention;
-
-