|
The reference (b)(4) has been allocated to this case by rayner.The event description provided states that the patient was dissatisfied with their post-operative vision.The patient elected to undergo an additional surgery to explant and exchange the lens.Lens explantation and exchange was performed on (b)(6) 2026."deviation from target refraction", "reduced vision" and "iol replacement or extraction" are listed in the "adverse events" section of the rayone ifu.The device was not returned to rayner.There are many factors which may influence the post-operative outcome of the patient including but not limited to; incomplete removal of ovd following iol implantation (capsular block/capsular bag distension syndrome), dry eye during biometry measurement, incorrect product selection, aniseikonia combined with unsuitable lens power selection, wrong lens power caused by incorrect biometry readings/calculations (e.G., previous lasik procedure), incorrect power selection (not using optimised a constants may be a contributory factor in this scenario - surgeons must always expect to personalise their own constants based on initial patient outcomes, with further personalisation as the number of eyes increases.), posterior synechiae, irregular capsular bag contraction, patient medical history (e.G., glaucoma, pseudoexfoliation syndrome), lens decentration or dislocation, incorrect or unstable fixation within the capsular bag, post-operative rotation of the lens, lens does not fit anatomy of the eye (e.G., too large or too small), capsulorhexis diameter too large and induced surgical astigmatism.Our review of production records for the rayone emv rao200e batch 095280409 showed that all manufacturing and quality checks were conducted with successful results.A review of vigilance data confirms this is an isolated event.No other incidents, of any type, have been received against the rayone emv rao200e batch 095280409.There is no evidence of a device-related cause of the patient's dissatisfaction with their post-operative vision.
|