| Model Number |
CNWET0 |
| Medical Device Problem Codes |
Break (1069); Failure to Align (2522)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Code |
Visual Disturbances (2140)
|
| Date of Event |
05/23/2023
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Serious Injury
|
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
A sample device was not returned for analysis.Complaint history and product history records were reviewed and documentation indicated the product met release criteria.Root cause has not been identified.The manufacturer internal reference number is:
(b)(4).
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
A nurse reported that after intra-ocular lens (iol) implantation, the patient had double vision and was viewing through the iol edge because the iol had subluxed.The haptic was found to be amputated but was unclear how that happened.At first it was assumed that due to zonular de-hiscence the iol would not position well.The iol appeared to be positioned correctly after the second surgery when the capsular tension ring (ctr) was implanted, however on post-operative day 1 (pod1) it was discovered to be subluxed once more.As a result, the patient underwent additional surgery, during which iris hooks were employed and an amputated haptic was discovered to be the problem.The iol was removed and replaced with another lens in a secondary procedure without any complications.According to additional information implantation was done in patient's left eye.The loader might have also contributed to the left eye problems.A replacement lens made by the company was used.After changing lenses, the patient's problems were solved.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
The lens was returned for evaluation.Solution is dried on the lens.One haptic is broken in the gusset area (not returned).The optic is split from the edge across the center of the lens.The file indicates the use of a qualified cartridge and viscoelastic.The file also indicates the use of a company iii handpiece.Broken haptic damage was observed.All lenses are 100% inspected for cosmetic attributes and the damage exhibited by the returned complaint sample would not have met company's release criteria.Based on our observation, it can be reasonably concluded that the damage is not manufacturing related.Due to the presence of surgical solution and the condition of the returned sample, the damage is most likely related to customer handling.The file indicates the clinical reason for explant was a broken haptic.Company intraocular lens instructions for use (ifu): follow the section regarding directions for use for information on the maximum allowed time for the intraocular lens (iol) to stay in the folded condition.Failure to adhere to manufacturer¿s recommendations may result in iol damage.Ifu note: during lens loading and insertion, do not allow the company iol to remain in a folded condition within the selected iol delivery system for more than 3 minutes prior to completing insertion into the capsular bag.The manufacturer internal reference number is: (b)(4).
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|