| Model Number |
60005 |
| Medical Device Problem Code |
Optical Distortion (3000)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Code |
Visual Disturbances (2140)
|
| Date of Event |
05/19/2020
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Serious Injury
|
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
Patient with bilateral light adjustable lens implants on (b)(6) 2020 without issue.Patient reported blurred vision on (b)(6) 2020.Premature photopolymerization detected.Patient reported 75% compliance with wearing uv protective eyewear (treatments were delayed due to covid-19).Both lenses were explanted: right eye explanted on (b)(6) 2020 (rxsight's first awareness was 5/20/2020).Left eye was explanted on (b)(6) 2020.Both lenses are pending return for evaluation.Both explanted lenses are in process of being returned for evaluation.Device history record for the lenses were reviewed.No issues were noted with the device history records.Lens serial number (b)(4) was implanted into the right eye.Manufacturing date of 2/20/2019.Expiration date was 1/31/2022.Udi: (b)(4).Lens serial number (b)(4) was implanted into the left eye.Manufacturing date of 2/23/2019.Expiration date was 1/31/2022.Udi: (b)(4).
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
Patient with bilateral light adjustable lens implants on (b)(6) 2020 without issue.Patient reported blurred vision on (b)(6) 2020.Premature photopolymerization detected.Patient reported 75% compliance with wearing uv protective eyewear (treatments were delayed due to covid-19).Both lenses were explanted: right eye explanted on (b)(6) 2020 (rxsight's first awareness was 5/20/2020).Left eye was explanted on (b)(6) 2020.Both lenses are pending return for evaluation.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
Both lenses were returned for evaluation.Inspection and evaluation of the lenses confirmed the presence of a zone on the anterior surface on both lenses.The zones are indicative of premature photopolymerization.As light treatments were delayed due to covid-19 interruption of clinical services, prolonged wear of the uv spectacles was required.The patient did not maintain full compliance (patient reported 75% compliance) with wearing uv protective eyewear.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|