| Model Number |
CCWET0 |
| Medical Device Problem Code |
Use of Incorrect Control/Treatment Settings (1126)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Codes |
Nausea (1970); Dizziness (2194)
|
| Date of Event |
09/10/2025
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Serious Injury
|
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
A facility representative reported following an intraocular lens (iol) implant procedure, the patient can't tolerate dizziness and nausea.The lens was explanted and replaced with company lens in a secondary procedure.The clinical reason for the explant was goal plano, got plano.Additional information was requested.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
The lens was returned inside a clear plastic bag with a piece of white medical sponge material.Solution was dried on the lens.The optic was cut into two pieces.One optic portion edge was torn and split in two separate areas.The other optic portion was cracked near the optic edge.A power (cylinder and sphere) and resolution recheck could not be conducted due to the lens damage.A device history record review and a non-conformance review of the reported lot number was conducted.The deviation review did not reveal any potential contributing factors to the reported complaint and all corresponding production release specifications defined in the device master record were met.A qualified cartridge, handpiece and viscoelastic were used.The root cause cannot be determined for the reported complaint.The lens was cut into two pieces, typical of an insertion and removal.Additional lens damage was observed.Each lens was subjected to a 100% assessment of the power and optical resolution during the manufacturing process in order to determine acceptability per the lens model and diopter.The power and resolution of the returned lens could not be re-evaluated due to the optic damage.The company model 22.0 diopter (1.5 extended depth of focus) lens was removed and replaced with a company model 21.5 lens.Due to the exchange of a vivity edof (extended depth of focus) company model 22.0 diopter lens for a monofocal lens that was also one-half diopter less may suggest that the replacement lens was an improved selection for this patient's vision needs.Information was provided on the completed questionnaire that in the surgeon's opinion, the cause of the event was "due to previous lasik".The manufacturer internal reference number is: (b)(4).
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|