| Model Number |
DIB00 |
| Medical Device Problem Code |
Crack (1135)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Code |
No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions (4582)
|
| Date of Event |
05/24/2023
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Malfunction
|
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
It was reported that the cartridge for the preloaded johnson and johnson(jnj) intraocular lens (iol) cracked at the tip.The issue was noticed during implantation.The iol did not contact the eye only the cartridge tip.Reportedly, there was no capsule tear, vitrectomy, incision enlargement or sutures.No further information was provided.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
Section a, patient information, section d6a, if implanted, give date: not applicable.There's no indication the lens was implanted.Section d6b, if explanted, give date: not applicable.There's no indication the lens was implanted.Hence, not explanted.Section h3-other (81): the device has not been 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.An attempt was made to obtain the missing information.However, the customer said it's not available.All pertinent information available to johnson & johnson surgical vision, inc.Has been submitted.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
Section d9: device available for evaluation? yes.Section d9: date returned to manufacturer: aug 3, 2023.Section h3: evaluated by manufacturer: yes.Device evaluation: the complaint lens, handpiece, handpiece tray, and folding carton were received.The complaint lens was received overridden and partially stuck in the handpiece cartridge and was also observed to be damaged, torn, and with haptic damage.Cartridge tip damage and cartridge crack was also observed.Plunger rod tip damage was also observed consistent with excessive force during lens advancement.No further handpiece defects and assembly issues were observed before and after disassembling the handpiece for evaluation.Trace amounts of viscoelastic residue was observed which suggests an inadequate amount of ovd was used during loading and insertion which may have contributed to the complaint issue.The stuck lens was not removed from the cartridge to avoid introducing additional damage unrelated to the return condition of the lens.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.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|
|