|
A nurse reported that the patient experienced diffuse lamellar keratitis in an unknown eye after refractive surgery.The patient¿s condition subsequently resolved.The hospital confirmed that there were no changes in postoperative medication regimens, and no changes were made to surgical instruments during this timeframe.There are multiple related reports for this event.This report addresses the unknown patient initial's, (b)(6) the unknown eye and other manufacturer reports will be filed.
|
|
H.3., h.6.: investigation, including root cause analysis, is in progress.A supplemental mdr will be filed as necessary in accordance with 21 cfr 803.56 when additional reportable information becomes available.The manufacturer internal reference number is: (b)(4).
|
|
Additional information provided in a.1., a.2., a.3.A., b.5., b.6., d.9., h.3., h.6., and h.11.A review of the device history record traceable to the reported serial number indicates that the product was processed and released according to the product¿s acceptance criteria.A review of the technical service onsite history showed no abnormalities that could have contributed to this event: the device was successfully verified prior and after the day of event.While the root cause and its origin are inconclusive, the following factors could potentially contribute to an outcome similar to the reported event: typically, diffuse lamellar keratitis is not directly attributable to the device.Contributing factors of diffuse lamellar keratitis could be sterilization of instruments, environment of the facility, surgical techniques as well as pre and post-operative medications.The review of logfile for the day of treatment shows all laser system functions were within specifications.The vacuum check, the energy check and the ablation check were performed successfully without issues.The logfile shows that the user performed two energy checks and performed on that day.The energy was stable during the whole day.The logfile shows twelve successfully performed treatments.The reported treatment could be identified in the logfile.The treatment of the patient's left eye was finished successfully without any issue.No relevant deviation between planned and performed energy is detectable for the reported treatment.The user operated within the recommended energy settings.The thickness of the flap was thinner than the recommended flap thickness.Review of the logfiles for the treatment day shows no relevant warning or error messages.No technical root cause could be identified.The system was working within specification.No complaint-related product is expected to be returned for investigation.Most recent onsite visit from field service engineer was performed and signed service installation record.The device meets specifications as per service installation record.No device related issues were identified based on the provided data.Therefore, the case is coded as "inconclusive - device met specifications".The manufacturer internal reference number is: (b)(4).
|
|
A nurse reported that the patient experienced diffuse lamellar keratitis in the left eye after refractive surgery.The patient¿s condition subsequently resolved.The hospital confirmed that there were no changes in postoperative medication regimens, and no changes were made to surgical instruments during this timeframe.There are multiple related reports for this event.This report addresses the patient initial's (b)(6), in the left eye and other manufacturer reports will be filed.
|