|
Received report indicating the intraocular lens (iol) was implanted with a non-jnj cartridge into the patient¿s right eye, but was then removed because the lens optic was cracked.The lens was removed and replaced with a non-jnj iol during the same procedure.There was some bleeding and diamox was used.Reportedly, the patient is doing well post-op.No further information was provided.
|
|
Section d9: device available for evaluation? yes.Section d9: date returned to manufacturer: jan 25, 2021.Section h3: returned to manufacturer? yes.Device evaluation: visual inspection under magnification revealed, viscoelastic residue on the optic body and haptics.A detached haptic, and the lens was received cut in pieces (not all pieces received).Which is consistent with a lens, that was handled during removal and replacement.Based on the return condition of the lens, no further product evaluation could be performed.The complaint issue could not be confirmed.And no product deficiency could be identified.A non-johnson cartridge was used with the jnj product.Per (b)(4) (dfu, tmf zkb00 and zlb00 (us), revision a), only select jnj cartridges and inserters validated by jnj (referenced in the dfu) should be used with tecnis multifocal lenses.Manufacturing record review: the manufacturing records for the product were reviewed.The product was manufactured and released according to specifications.The search revealed, one complaint folder for suboptimal results.And another complaint folder (duplicate sn) that has since been voided.These complaint issues are not related.Therefore, no escalations are required.Conclusion: as a result of the investigation ,there is no indication of a product quality deficiency and the reported issue could not be verified.All pertinent information available to johnson & johnson surgical vision, inc.Has been submitted.
|