|
If implanted, give date: not applicable, as lens was removed in the initial surgery.If explanted, give date: not applicable, as lens was removed in the initial surgery.Device evaluation: the product was returned to the manufacturing site for evaluation.Visual inspection using magnification was performed to the returned sample.The plunger and pushrod was observed in advanced position and in good condition.The pushrod was observed in its correct orientation.Residues of viscoelastic material were observed on cartridge.No damaged was observed to the cartridge and to the device.Only a half of lens returned outside the device.No damaged was observed to the haptic.Based on the sample evaluation, there is no evidence to suggest that the complaint unit has been affected by the manufacturing process.The condition in which the sample returned is consistent with a product that was handled and prepare for surgical process.The complaint issue reported could not be verified.Based on the analyzed of the returned, there is no indication of product quality deficiency.Manufacturing record review: the manufacturing records for the intraocular lens were reviewed.The product was manufactured and released according to specification.The search revealed no additional investigation request (ir) for this production order number has been received.Conclusion: as a result of the investigation there is no indication of a product quality deficiency.All pertinent information available to johnson & johnson surgical vision, inc.Has been submitted.
|
|
It was reported that the preloaded intraocular lens (iol) had bent or broken haptic.The lens was inserted into patient's right eye, however, was removed.The outcome did not significantly interfere with activities of daily life and the patient had recovered.No further information was available.
|