|
A healthcare professional reported that during an intraocular lens (iol) implant procedure, when surgeon inserted the lens into the patient's eye he noticed the presence of an abnormal line or mark on the implant when observed under microscope.Subsequently, it was removed during initial procedure and completed with new iol.Additional information was requested.
|
|
The lens was returned positioned incorrectly in the lens case inside the opened, folded pouch placed into the carton.Solution was dried on the lens.The optic was broken (cut) into two pieces, typical of an insertion and removal.One optic portion anterior side up was placed on the other optic portion, posterior side up.One optic portion has broken haptic damage in the gusset area.The broken haptic portion was not returned.The optic was scraped on the posterior surface beginning near the optic edge and the damage travelled into split and cracked damage.Next to this damage, a small area of the optic posterior was broken and a travelling scratch mark was observed.The center of this optic portion has a linear area of cracked damage.Additional posterior surface split cracked areas were observed.The other half of the lens has split damage on the anterior and posterior sides of the haptic/optic junction.This optic portion has a large broken optic edge area of damage.The broken optic portion was not returned.This optic portion has small cracked areas on the posterior surface.Product history records were reviewed and the documentation indicated the product met release criteria.Associated product information was not provided.It is unknown if qualified products were used.The returned lens was extremely damaged.The majority of the damage was observed on the posterior side.The optic was scraped along the posterior surface beginning near the optic edge with additional posterior surface lens damage observed.The lens damage most likely occurred with a metal instrument used to position the lens in the cartridge or potentially by a plunger underride during delivery.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, and the review of manufacturing records, 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 ifu instructs: using holding forceps, grasp the lens by the optic edge and gently place the lens anterior side up into the back of the ovd-filled cartridge.The lens should be inserted until the optic is a little more than half-way inside the cartridge.Use the holding forceps to gently push down on the lens, verifying that the lens is on the bottom surface of the cartridge.Using holding forceps, take the trailing haptic, and gently fold the haptic onto the anterior side of the optic.Slowly grip or push the optic edge to position the lens as far into the cartridge as the forceps will permit, while ensuring the lens remains on the bottom surface of the cartridge and the trailing haptic remains on the optic.Failure to follow these steps may cause the lens to advance incorrectly causing delivery issues and/or damage.It is unknown if qualified associated products were used.The ifu instructs: company foldable iols are qualified for use with an company qualified delivery system (handpiece and cartridge) and ophthalmic viscosurgical device (ovd) combination.The ifu instructs that an company qualified delivery system and viscoelastic combination should be used.The use of an unqualified combination may cause damage to the lens and potential complications during the implantation process.Information was provided that the 21.0 diopter (1.5 extended depth of focus) lens was removed and replaced with another 21.0 diopter (1.5 extended depth of focus) lens.The manufacturer internal reference number is: (b)(4).
|