| Model Number |
SA60AT |
| Medical Device Problem Code |
Device Dislodged or Dislocated (2923)
|
| Health Effect - Clinical Code |
Blurred Vision (2137)
|
| Date of Event |
03/06/2026
|
|
Type of Reportable Event
|
Serious Injury
|
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
The lens was returned in a specimen cup.Solution was dried on the lens.The lens was removed and cleaned with klrp for further evaluation.A power and resolution verification was conducted.The optical resolution is acceptable; lens meets specification for focal length equaling a 22.0 diopter lens.No lens issues observed.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.Associated products were provided; however, they would be unrelated to the "blurred vision" complaint.The product investigation could not identify a root cause for the reported complaint.The lens was returned and was cleaned with klrp for further evaluation.A power and resolution verification was conducted.The focal length and resolution were within specifications for a 22.0 diopter lens.No lens issues observed.Each lens is 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.Information was provided that the company 22.0 diopter lens model was replaced with a company 22.5 diopter lens model.Due to the exchange for a 0.5 higher diopter difference lens may suggest that the replacement lens model may have been an improved choice for the patient's vision needs.The manufacturer internal reference number is: (b)(4).
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
An administrative assistant reported that following intraocular lens (iol) implantation in the right eye, the patient experienced blurred vision the next day.The lens was removed and replaced with a company lens of different model and half diopter more power sulcus lens in a secondary procedure.The clinical reason for explant was that the lens was unstable in the patient's eye.There was no further impact to the patient.Additional information has been requested but is not available at the time of this report.
|
| |
|
Additional Manufacturer Narrative
|
|
Additional information provided in section b.5.And h.11.Upon further review of the available information, it was determined that the initial report did not meet reporting criteria per regulation since the reported events were related to the anatomical condition of the patient (posterior capsule was unstable) and not related to product.No further reports required.The manufacturer internal reference number is: (b)(4).
|
| |
|
Event or Problem Description
|
|
According to the additional information received, the posterior capsule was unstable, that's why the lens kept falling to the back of the eye.Consequently, a secondary sulcus lens implantation was performed using a different lens.According to the surgeon, the event was not related to the product.
|
| |
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|