|
It was reported the intraocular lens (iol) was implanted in the patient's operative eye.The power needs to be adjusted and the doctor plans on explanting the iol.Attempts were made to contact the customer account requesting additional information regarding complaint however, to date no response has been received.05-aug-2021 additional information received confirming iol was explanted (b)(6) 2021 and replaced with the same model lens with a different diopter size; thus indicating a calculation issue and not a product issue.It was reported the patient is doing great post-op.Attempts were made to contact the customer account requesting additional information regarding complaint however, to date no response has been received.20-jun-2022 additional information received from duplicate complaint stating patient not happy with results from day 1 post-operative (op).Distance vision was ok, however, patient was unable to read.Intermediate and near vision was also reported as blurry.Patient felt vision was worse than prior to her surgery; hyperopic outcome was also reported.Iol explant date was corrected from (b)(6) 2021 to (b)(6) 2021.There was no patient injury, no vitrectomy performed, and no incision enlargement required.The iol is not available for return as it was discarded by the facility.No further information is available.
|
|
Device evaluation: product evaluation could not be performed since, at the time of this investigation, the product had not been received/discarded.Therefore, the reported issue could not be verified, and product quality deficiency could not be determined.Manufacturing records review: the manufacturing records for the product were reviewed, the product was manufactured and released according to specification.The lens diopter results obtained from the miq electronic system show that this production order (po) was released within diopter specifications.Historical data analysis: a search of complaints revealed that one (01) additional complaint folder was found as part of this production order (po) number - voided duplicate serial number complaint.Based on complaint history review (chr), no escalation was required.Conclusion: based on the investigation results, there is no indication of a product malfunction or product quality deficiency.The reported issue was not verified.All pertinent information available to johnson & johnson surgical vision, inc.Has been submitted.
|