| Lot Number |
231811 |
| Medical Device Problem Code |
Adverse Event Without Identified Device or Use Problem (2993)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Code |
Toxic Anterior Segment Syndrome (TASS) (4469)
|
| Date of Event |
02/29/2024
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Malfunction
|
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
Based on the review of the batch documentation, lenstec can confirm that all procedures in the manufacturing and packaging of the devices were conducted correctly.There was no evidence to suggests that any aspect of these devices was responsible for the reported incident.Additionally, the endotoxin results were within acceptable limits.
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
Lenstec received an email stating "the patients had symptoms of tass after the surgery.There was patient injury and the lenses remain implanted.".
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
Lenstec received an email stating "the patients had symptoms of tass after the surgery.There was patient injury and the lenses remain implanted.".
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
Based on the initial report (documentation analyses, endotoxin check results and complaint history) and the assessment by lenstec's medical monitor, lenstec concludes that there was no evidence to suggest that any aspect of these devices was responsible for the reported incident.The assessment by lenstec's medical monitor stated that there are no details or similar cases from these batches to suggest that the iols are at fault in this case.Hence, no further action is recommended.Furthermore, lenstec confirms that the lens, its design and the manufacturing process are not at fault due to the extensive testing that we have performed on this model.Assessment of the incident by lenstec's medical monitor the following observations were noted: 1 - the surgeon, had two patients in (b)(6) hospital suffer what was thought to be toxic anterior segment syndrome.One surgery was in 2023, while the other was in 2024.The reason for such late (i.E.More than one year postoperatively for each) reporting was not given.The iols were both softec hds and from separate non-outdated lots.The storage and handling of these common powers (+20.0 and +21.5 d) were not detailed.The preoperative risk factors, intraoperative surgical medications/consumables/reused instruments, and postoperative management were left out of the complaint.Lenstec has no associated complaints elsewhere that would implicate flawed manufacturing.2 - given the extreme lack of information, i have no reason to believe there is a lenstec-related role in this complaint.I would be happy to revisit it if concrete information arose.In the meantime, i am recommending no further action for this complaint.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|