Age/date of birth: unknown/not provided.Sex/gender: unknown/not provided.Date of event: unknown, not provided.If implanted; give date: n/a (not applicable).The cartridge is not an implantable device.If explanted; give date: n/a (not applicable).The cartridge is not an implantable device; therefore, not explanted.(b)(6).All pertinent information available to johnson and johnson surgical vision has been submitted.
|
In follow up, it was clarified that the serial number (b)(6) entered in section ''d11'' of the initial mdr report was incorrect.The correct serial number (sn) for the concomitant product was reported to be "(b)(6)" which is captured in this supplemental mdr report.The following field was updated accordingly: section d11: concomitant medical product: intraocular lens sn: (b)(6).Device evaluation: the cartridge was not returned for evaluation.The customer provided photos that show the alleged foreign material or fragment as described by the customer; however, no photos of the cartridge was provided.Based on the provided photos, it could not be determined that the foreign material is or not related to the cartridge.Manufacturing records review: the manufacturing records for the device were reviewed and no discrepancy found during the mrr (manufacturing record review).The units was manufactured and released according to specifications.A search in complaint system revealed no additional complaint has been received for this production order number.Conclusion: as a result of the investigation there is no indication of a product quality deficiency and the reported issue could not be verified.All pertinent information available to johnson & johnson surgical vision, inc.Has been submitted.H3 other text : placeholder.
|
Additional information: the original lens case was received with the ¿tiny fragment¿ described as a ¿silk-like substance¿.The complaint event was confirmed, however since the lens case was opened and handled by the customer, how and when this foreign material was introduced cannot be confirmed.The foreign material was sent to an external lab for evaluation.A summary of the results is as follows: ftir analysis indicates the material is consistent with polypropylene by comparison with a reference from the external laboratories spectrum library.Specifically, the peaks at ~2951, 2917, 2871, 2837, 1455, 1375, 1167, 997, 972, 899, 840 and 809 cm-1 overlap with the polypropylene reference, supporting the proposed assignment.In addition, the broad peaks at ~3349 and 1645 cm-1 indicate the presence of -oh bonding which usually suggests water content.The results of the external investigation were then reviewed by the manufacturing site subject matter expert and the following information was provided: based on the evaluation performed, the coated cartridge is the potential source of the foreign material.Investigation request was opened for the 1mtec30 cartridge, but the used cartridge sample was not returned for evaluation; however, the manufacturing process record was evaluated and the devices were manufactured and released within specifications.Although the foreign material has a correlation with the coated cartridge (cartridge, molded, platinum 1 series) we cannot confirm if the foreign material came from the cartridge because the cartridge sample was not returned for evaluation.The coated cartridge manufacturing process has controls to identify and discard units with ¿foreign material¿.Based on the manufacturing controls in-place, manufacturing process record review and the evaluation of the foreign material, the reported complaint cannot be confirmed as cartridge manufacturing process related.All pertinent information available to johnson and johnson surgical vision has been submitted.
|