|
|
| Model Number |
ZKU150 |
| Medical Device Problem Code |
Adverse Event Without Identified Device or Use Problem (2993)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Code |
Discomfort (2330)
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Serious Injury
|
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
The best estimate date is between oct 12, 2022 and mar 15, 2023.Section h3-other (81): the device was not returned for evaluation; therefore, a failure analysis of the complaint device cannot be completed.A review of the device history record, complaint trending, and risk documentation for this device will be performed.Upon completion of the review, if there is any further relevant information a supplemental medwatch will be filed.Attempts were made to obtain the missing information; however, no additional information has been received.All pertinent information available to johnson & johnson surgical vision, inc.Has been submitted.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
It was reported that the wrong power intraocular lens (iol) was used, so the lens was explanted from the left eye in a secondary procedure.A non-johnson and johnson iol was implanted as replacement (3-piece monofocal, different diopter of 18.0).There was no patient injury and no medical or surgical intervention was indicated.It is unknown how the patient is doing post-operative.Through follow-up, it was learned that the reason for explant was that the patient could not tolerate the multifocal.After about a month of trying to adapt to the multifocal, the patient could not.Pre-operative best corrected visual acuity (va) was 20/20.Post-operative (initial implant) best corrected va was 20/20.The intended target refraction was plano.Post-operative best corrected visual acuity (post-replacement implant) was 20/20.There was no calculation issue.The patient outcome at discharge was good.No further information was provided.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
The product was returned for evaluation.Additional information received reported that no wound enlargement, suture, or vitrectomy was required and there were no complications.Amvisc viscoelastic and platinum injector were used with the intraocular lens (iol).The patient age at the time of the event was 70 years old.No further information was provided.Additional information: section a2: age: 70 year(s).D10: concomitant medical products: amvisc, platinum injector.Section d9: device available for evaluation? yes.Section d9: date returned to manufacturer: apr 24, 2023.Section h3: evaluated by manufacturer: yes.Device evaluation: the complaint lens was received cut in half and no defects were observed before and after cleaning the lens.No defects that could contribute to visual issues were observed.Based on the return condition of the lens no further evaluation could be performed.The complaint issue was not confirmed.The other observed issue during the product evaluation could not be confirmed to be related to a manufacturing or design issue.Conclusion: as per complaint investigation results, the product was released within specifications.A relationship between the device and the reported incident could not be determined.The complaint issue reported could not be confirmed; therefore, there is no indication of a product deficiency or product malfunction.All pertinent information available to johnson & johnson surgical vision, inc.Has been submitted.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|
|
|