Skip to content

Clareon Vivity CCWET0 (REF CCWET0.070)Recalls & reported problems

Alcon Laboratories, Inc. · CLAREON UVA VIVITY · Class 3 · Implant

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

Adverse event reports
2
Deaths reported
0
Injuries reported
1
Recalls naming it
0

Summary

The FDA's MAUDE database contains 2 adverse event reports that list this exact device (DI 00380652405515), received between Jan 22, 2026 and Jun 5, 2026 — classified as 1 injury, 1 malfunction.

The most frequently reported specific device problem is “Break” (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: 1 reportsFeb 2026: 0 reportsMar 2026: 0 reportsApr 2026: 0 reportsMay 2026: 0 reportsJun 2026: 1 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 Problem1
  • Break1

Patient problems

  • Insufficient Information1
  • Visual Impairment1

Recent adverse event reports

The 2 most recent of 2 reports, in the reporter's own words as published by the FDA.

  • MalfunctionJun 5, 2026Break

    A NON-HEALTH CARE PROFESSIONAL REPORTED THAT DURING AN INTRAOCULAR LENS (IOL) IMPLANT PROCEDURE, UPON IMPLANTATION OF THE LENS A SIGNIFICANT FRACTURE IN THE TRAILING HAPTIC WAS NOTED. THE SURGEON MADE THE DECISION TO REMOVE AND REPLACE THE LENS WITH THE SAME MODEL AND POWER. THE PROCEDURE WAS COMPLETED ON THE SAME DAY WITHOUT ANY COMPLICATIONS. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION HAS BEEN REQUESTED BUT IS NOT AVAILABLE AT THE TIME OF THIS REPORT.

    Patient problems: Insufficient Information

    MAUDE report 25412720 ↗
  • InjuryJan 22, 2026Adverse Event Without Identified Device or Use Problem

    A NURSE REPORTED THAT, AFTER INTRAOCULAR LENS IMPLANTATION SURGERY, THE PATIENT WAS UNABLE TO ADJUST TO MULTIFOCAL IMPLANT. HENCE THE LENS WAS EXPLANTED AND REPLACED WITH ANOTHER UNSPECIFIED MONOFOCAL LENS IN A SECONDARY PROCEDURE. THE CLINICAL REASON FOR EXPLANT WAS MECHANICAL COMPLICATION OF LENS. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION HAS BEEN REQUESTED.

    Patient problems: Visual Impairment

    MAUDE report 24147064 ↗

Other Extended Depth Of Focus Intraocular Lens devices

All Extended Depth Of Focus Intraocular Lens devices →

Sources and updates

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