Skip to content

ACRYSOF® RESTOR® SV25T0 (UDI 00380652307765)Recalls & reported problems

Alcon Laboratories, Inc. · AcrySof(R) IQ ReSTOR(R) MULTIFOCAL IOL, SINGLE-PIECE ACRYLIC FOLDABLE LENS, UV WITH BLUE LIGHTFILTER, 13.0mm LENGTH, 6.0mm APODIZEDDIFFRACTIVE ASPHERIC OPTIC. · Class 3 · Implant

Data updated Oct 13, 2026 from official FDA records · Editorial policy

Adverse event reports
4
Deaths reported
0
Injuries reported
3
Recalls naming it
0

Summary

The FDA's MAUDE database contains 4 adverse event reports that list this exact device (DI 00380652307765), received between Jul 7, 2021 and Feb 12, 2026 — classified as 3 injuries, 1 malfunction.

The most frequently reported specific device problem is “Particulates” (1 report).

Reports come from manufacturers, hospitals and patients and are not verified by the FDA. A report does not prove the device caused the event, and counts can't be used to compare devices or estimate failure rates. How this data works · Data updated Oct 13, 2026.

Reports received per month

Nov 2023: 0 reportsDec 2023: 0 reportsJan 2024: 0 reportsFeb 2024: 0 reportsMar 2024: 0 reportsApr 2024: 0 reportsMay 2024: 0 reportsJun 2024: 0 reportsJul 2024: 0 reportsAug 2024: 0 reportsSep 2024: 0 reportsOct 2024: 0 reportsNov 2024: 0 reportsDec 2024: 0 reportsJan 2025: 0 reportsFeb 2025: 0 reportsMar 2025: 0 reportsApr 2025: 0 reportsMay 2025: 0 reportsJun 2025: 0 reportsJul 2025: 0 reportsAug 2025: 0 reportsSep 2025: 0 reportsOct 2025: 0 reportsNov 2025: 0 reportsDec 2025: 0 reportsJan 2026: 0 reportsFeb 2026: 1 reportsMar 2026: 0 reportsApr 2026: 0 reportsMay 2026: 0 reportsJun 2026: 0 reportsJul 2026: 0 reportsAug 2026: 0 reportsSep 2026: 0 reportsOct 2026: 0 reports2024202520261
Last 36 months. The most recent month may be incomplete.

Most reported problems

Device problems

  • Adverse Event Without Identified Device or Use Problem2
  • Appropriate Device Problem Term/Code Not Available1
  • Particulates1

Patient problems

  • Visual Disturbances3
  • Halo1
  • Visual Impairment1

Recent adverse event reports

The 4 most recent of 4 reports, in the reporter's own words as published by the FDA.

  • InjuryFeb 12, 2026Particulates

    A NON-HEALTHCARE PROFESSIONAL REPORTED THAT FOLLOWING THE INTRAOCULAR LENS (IOL) IMPLANT PROCEDURE, PATIENT HAD HALOS AND GLARE. THE LENS WAS EXCHANGED WITH COMPANY DIFFERENT LENS TYPE AFTER THE INITIAL IMPLANT PROCEDURE. THE CLINICAL REASON FOR THE EXPLANT WAS INCLUSIONS IN IOL. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION HAS BEEN REQUESTED.

    Patient problems: Visual Disturbances

    MAUDE report 24329574 ↗
  • MalfunctionNov 8, 2022Appropriate Device Problem Term/Code Not Available; Appropriate Device Problem Term/Code Not Available

    A PHYSICIAN REPORTED OF GLISTENINGS. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION HAS BEEN REQUESTED AND RECEIVED STATED THAT PATIENT WAS NOT HAPPY, IT SEEMS LIKE LOOKING UNDERWATER WAS ABLE TO READ J3 UNAIDED AND ENJOYED GOOD NEAR VISION. NO FURTHER INFORMATION AVAILABLE.

    Patient problems: Visual Disturbances

    MAUDE report 15751724 ↗
  • InjuryJun 23, 2022Adverse Event Without Identified Device or Use Problem; Adverse Event Without Identified Device or Use Problem

    A OPHTHALMIC SURGEON REPORTED FOLLOWING AN INTRAOCULAR LENS (IOL) IMPLANT PROCEDURE, PATIENT IS EXPERIENCED GLARES AND HALOS AROUND LETTERS WHEN READING SIGNS WHILE DRIVING. SHE ALSO REPORTS SEEING A GRAY OUTLINE AROUND LETTERS. PATIENT HAS NOTICED AN IMPROVEMENT SINCE HER 1 WEEK POST OPERATION VISIT. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION HAS BEEN REQUESTED AND RECEIVED THAT THE SURGERY OCCURRED ON 27 APR 2022. VISCOELASTIC WAS USED TO EXPAND THE CAPSULE AND FLOAT THE INTRAOCULAR LENS INTO THE ANTERIOR CHAMBERS. THE LENS WAS CUT IN HALF USING FORCEPS AND SCISSORS. EYE DROPS WERE RECOMMENDED. SYMPTOMS WERE RESOLVED.

    Patient problems: Halo; Visual Disturbances

    MAUDE report 14786420 ↗
  • InjuryJul 7, 2021Adverse Event Without Identified Device or Use Problem; Adverse Event Without Identified Device or Use Problem

    A CLINICAL DIRECTOR REPORTED THAT FOLLOWING AN INTRAOCULAR LENS (IOL) IMPLANT PROCEDURE, THE PATIENT EXPERIENCED UNDESIRED VISUAL QUALITY. THE IOL WAS EXCHANGED FOR ANOTHER LENS APPROXIMATELY 1 YEAR AND 6 MONTHS FOLLOWING THE INITIAL IMPLANT PROCEDURE. THE CLINICAL REASON GIVEN FOR THE EXPLANT WAS ¿MONOCULAR DIPLOPIA.¿ ADDITIONAL INFORMATION WAS REQUESTED.

    Patient problems: Visual Impairment

    MAUDE report 12131551 ↗

Other LENS, MULTIFOCAL INTRAOCULAR devices

All LENS, MULTIFOCAL INTRAOCULAR devices →

Sources and updates

How reports and recalls are matched · Editorial policy · Report an error on this page