• 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, INCORPORATED RAINDROP INLAY; IMPLANT, CORNEAL, REFRACTIVE

  • 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, INCORPORATED RAINDROP INLAY; IMPLANT, CORNEAL, REFRACTIVE Back to Search Results
Device Problem Adverse Event Without Identified Device or Use Problem (2993)
Patient Problems Corneal Clouding/Hazing (1878); Failure of Implant (1924)
Event Type  Injury  
Event Description
I had a raindrop inlay implanted in (b)(6) 2017.I almost immediately had problems with haziness in that eye and it has progressively gotten worse.I was just told to see my ophthalmologist and he suggested steroids, but i am very upset and confused.I wish the fda and my doctor had told patients that this was just experimental still and/or that i had had access to better advice from the start.Very, very unhappy about this inlay.
 
Search Alerts/Recalls

  New Search  |  Submit an Adverse Event Report

Brand Name
RAINDROP INLAY
Type of Device
IMPLANT, CORNEAL, REFRACTIVE
Manufacturer (Section D)
REVISION OPTICS, INCORPORATED
MDR Report Key8089417
MDR Text Key128180578
Report NumberMW5081455
Device Sequence Number1
Product Code LQE
Combination Product (y/n)N
Reporter Country CodeUS
Number of Events Reported1
Summary Report (Y/N)N
Report Source Voluntary
Reporter Occupation Patient
Type of Report Initial
Report Date 11/15/2018
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 No Information
Was Device Available for Evaluation? Yes
Initial Date Manufacturer Received Not provided
Initial Date FDA Received11/19/2018
Was Device Evaluated by Manufacturer? No Information
Type of Device Usage N
Patient Sequence Number1
Patient Outcome(s) Required Intervention;
Patient Age51 YR
-
-